Cases 21 - 30 of 71
Files v. King et al
as 1:2016cv01952
Plaintiff:
Earnest J Files, Jr
Defendant:
Julian M King, State of Alabama, Steven Dale Giddens and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Barnes v. Cullman County District Court et al
as 5:2016cv01691
Plaintiff:
Gordon Eugene Barnes
Defendant:
Cullman County District Court, Cullman County District Attorney, Wilson Blalock and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Files v. Tallapoosa County Narcotics Task Force et al (INMATE 2)
as 3:2016cv00770
Plaintiff:
Earnest J. Files, Jr.
Defendant:
Tallapoosa County Narcotics Task Force, Jimmy Abbett, E. Paul Jones and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Taylor v. Meeks et al (INMATE 2)
as 2:2016cv00661
Plaintiff:
Princeton T. Taylor
Defendant:
Dennis Meeks, Preston Hughes, Ricky Coleman and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Taylor v. Meeks et al (INMATE 2)
as 3:2016cv00661
Plaintiff:
Princeton T. Taylor
Defendant:
Dennis Meeks, Preston Hughes, Ricky Coleman and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Mickles v. Steele et al
as 1:2016cv00369
Plaintiff:
Terrell Mickles
Defendant:
William Steele, John T. Moore, Kenyen R. Brown and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Barnes v. Cullman County Detention Center et al
as 5:2016cv01040
Plaintiff:
Gordon Eugene Barnes
Defendant:
Cullman County Detention Center, Matt Gentry, Dr Lyren and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Mertens v. Gentry et al
as 5:2016cv00947
Plaintiff:
Rocky Joe Mertens
Defendant:
Gentry, Lyren and Adam Whitehead
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Martin v. Olson et al (INMATE 2)
as 1:2016cv00334
Plaintiff:
Daniel Jesus Martin
Defendant:
Wally Olson, Adam Bruhn and Clinton Buggs
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Campbell v. Gentry et al
as 5:2016cv00590
Plaintiff:
William Oneal Campbell
Defendant:
Matt Gentry, Dr. Lyrene, Adam Whitehead 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.
