Cases 121 - 130 of 193
Denton v. Boyd et al
as 3:2010cv00847
Petitioner:
Richard Cornell Denton
Respondent:
Louis Boyd and Attorney General of the State of Alabama, The
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Neil Walker v. State of Alabama, et al
as 10-11293
Plaintiff - Appellant:
NEIL WALKER
Respondent - Appellee:
STATE OF ALABAMA, ALABAMA BOARD OF PARDON & PAROLES and LOUIS BOYD, Warden
Jones v. Boyd et al (INMATE 2)
as 2:2010cv00217
Plaintiff:
Melvin Jones
Defendant:
Louis Boyd and Larry W. Anglin
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Walker v. State of Alabama (INMATE3)
as 1:2010cv00124
Plaintiff:
Neil Walker
Defendant:
State of Alabama, Louis Boyd and Troy King
Cause Of Action: O
Kambui v. Boyd et al (INMATE 1)
as 2:2010cv00002
Plaintiff:
Owanna Kambui
Defendant:
Louis Boyd, Carter F. Davenport, Dr. Darbouze and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Henderson v. Boyd et al (INMATE2)
as 2:2009cv01169
Plaintiff:
Anthony Maurice Henderson
Defendant:
Louis Boyd, Carter Davenport, Ms. Caffie and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Burns v. Boyd
as 1:2009cv00834
Petitioner:
Thomas Burns
Respondent:
Louis Boyd
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Ray v. Allen et al
as 4:2009cv02523
Petitioner:
Michael Allen Ray
Respondent:
Richard Allen, Louis Boyd and Attorney General of the State of Alabama, The
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Johnson v. Boyd et al (INMATE 2)
as 2:2009cv01117
Plaintiff:
DeMarquies Wayne Johnson
Defendant:
Louis Boyd, Carter Davenport, Jameka Caffie and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Hines v. Boyd et al (INMATE 1)
as 2:2009cv01113
Plaintiff:
Ronald Hines
Defendant:
Louis Boyd, Ms Seal and Dr. Darbouze
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
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.
