Cases 81 - 90 of 487
Foreman v. Gwathney et al (INMATE 1)(MEMBER CASE)
as 2:2021cv00804
Plaintiff:
Mack Auther Foreman, Jr.
Defendant:
Leigh Gwathney, Dwayne Spurlock, Cliff Walker and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Brueckel v. State of Texas et al
as 5:2021cv01034
Plaintiff:
Jonathan Brueckel
Defendant:
State of Texas, All Arresting Officers, Magistrate Judge and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Foreman v. Gwathney et al (INMATE 1)(LEAD CASE)
as 2:2021cv00675
Plaintiff:
Mack Auther Foreman, Jr.
Defendant:
Leigh Gwathney, Dwayne Spurlock and Cliff Walker
Consolidated Defendant:
Alabama Board of Pardon & Paroles
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Foreman v. Gwathney et al
as 2:2021cv01353
Plaintiff:
Mack Auther Foreman, Jr
Defendant:
Leigh Gwathney, Dwayne Spurlock, Cliff Walker and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Westley v. Harris et al
as 4:2021cv01672
Plaintiff:
James Westley
Defendant:
Warden Brandeshawn Harris, Warden LaShann Eppinger, Michael Beebe and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Foreman v. Gwathney et al
as 2:2021cv01076
Plaintiff:
Mack Arthur Foreman, Jr and Mack Auther Foreman, Jr
Defendant:
Leigh Gwathney, Dwayne Spurlock and Cliff Walker
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Foreman v. Gordy (INMATE 1)
as 2:2021cv00519
Plaintiff:
Mack Auther Foreman, Jr.
Defendant:
Christopher Gordy
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Foreman v. Watkins
as 1:2021cv00320
Plaintiff:
Mack Auther Foreman, Jr.
Defendant:
Paul Watkins
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Resendez v. First Responding Officer et al
as 5:2021cv00688
Plaintiff:
Jesus Alberto Resendez
Defendant:
First Responding Officer, Second Respoding Officer, Magistrate Judge and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Foreman v. May et al
as 1:2021cv00957
Respondent:
Warden Robert May and Kathleen Jennings
Petitioner:
David D Foreman
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
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.
