Cases 21 - 30 of 821
Oliver v. Laman
as 3:2023cv00473
Plaintiff:
Derrick Antavis Oliver
Defendant:
David Laman
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Childs v. Lamar et al (INMATE 2)
as 2:2023cv00999
Plaintiff:
Yancey A. Childs
Defendant:
David Lamar and Steven T Marshall
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Santana v. State of Alabama et al
as 6:2023cv00954
Petitioner:
David Santana
Respondent:
State of Alabama, Administrator White and Attorney General State of Alabama
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2023cv00435
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Jackson v. Lamar et al (INMATE 2)
as 2:2023cv00432
Plaintiff:
Dexter Jackson
Defendant:
David Lamar and Steven T. Marshall
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Jacobson v. Horton
as 4:2023cv00924
Petitioner:
David Otto Jacobson
Respondent:
Jonathan W Horton
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
Childs v. Lamar et al (INMATE 2)
as 2:2023cv00396
Plaintiff:
Yancey A. Childs
Defendant:
David Lamar and Steven T. Marshall
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Palmore v. YesCare Corp. et al (INMATE 4)
as 2:2023cv00368
Plaintiff:
George Washington Palmore
Defendant:
YesCare Corp., Tahir Siddiq, David Lamar and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Horton v. Gentry
as 5:2023cv00511
Plaintiff:
David Lee Horton
Defendant:
Matt Gentry
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Lacey v. Potts
as 1:2023cv00071
Petitioner:
Adrian L. Lacey
Respondent:
David Potts
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
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.
