Cases filed in the US District Court for the Northern District of Georgia
Cases 21 - 30 of 135
Redden v. Georgia Department of Corrections et al
as 4:2018cv00174
Plaintiff: Rodger Dale Redden
Defendant: Governor Nathan Deal and Georgia Department of Corrections
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Rahrer v. Deal et al
as 2:2018cv00117
Defendant: Leslie Abernathy-Maddox, Janet Bagely, Russel Troy McClelland and others
Plaintiff: John J. Rahrer, III
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Wimbush v. Deal et al
as 1:2018cv02085
Petitioner: Therian Wimbush
Respondent: Nathan Deal, Gregory C. Dozier, Willie Sue Mickens and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241
York v. Carr et al
as 1:2018cv01726
Plaintiff: Asma M. York
Defendant: Christopher M. Carr, Office of the Attorney General, Nathan Deal and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
Andrews et al v. Shulkin et al
as 1:2018cv01533
Plaintiff: Bertha Andrews , Denorris Andrews and James Andrews
Defendant: David J. Shulkin, John Nathan Deal and Karen C. Gainey ESQ.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1346
Smith v. Deal et al
as 1:2018cv01083
Plaintiff: Willie G. Smith
Defendant: Nathan Deal, Robyn A. Crittenden and Virginia Ginger Pryor
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
Green et al v. Deal et al
as 1:2018cv01040
Plaintiff: Janel Green and Mary Margaret Oliver
Defendant: Nathan Deal , Steve Stancil and Jamiel Jones
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Swift Bey v. Deal et al
as 1:2018cv00906
Plaintiff: Blaane Marco Swift Bey
Defendant: Nathan Deal, Christopher M. Carr, Richard T. Hamil and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2018cv00152
Plaintiff: Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant: Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 12101
Love v. Deal et al
as 1:2017cv05382
Plaintiff: Eric Love
Defendant: Nathan Deal , Frank Poe , Paul Guerricci and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?