Cases 1 - 9 of 9
Willie Asbury v. David Tartarsky
as 15-6650
Plaintiff - Appellant:
WILLIE J. ASBURY, a/k/a Sa'id Abdullah Al'Rashid
Defendant - Appellee:
DAVID TARTARSKY, DON DRISKELL, JOETTE D. SCARBOROUGH and others
Defendant:
JOHN KINARD, JAMES BARBER, III, JOSEPH MCCROREY and others
Willie Asbury v. David Tartarsky
as 14-6731
Plaintiff - Appellant:
WILLIE J. ASBURY, a/k/a Sa'id Abdullah Al'Rashid
Defendant - Appellee:
DAVID TARTARSKY, DON DRISKELL, JOETTE D. SCARBOROUGH and others
Defendant:
JOHN KINARD, JAMES R. BARBER, III, JOSEPH R. MCCROREY and others
Willie Asbury v. John Kinard
as 14-6639
Plaintiff - Appellant:
WILLIE J. ASBURY, a/k/a Sa'id Abdullah Al'Rashid
Defendant - Appellee:
DAVID TARTARSKY, DON DRISKELL, JOETTE D. SCARBOROUGH and others
Asbury v. Tartarsky et al
as 8:2013cv03364
Plaintiff:
Willie James Asbury
Defendant:
David Tartarsky, Don Driskell, Joette Scarborough and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Barber v. Owens et al
as 1:2013cv00439
Petitioner:
Edward E. Barber, III
Respondent:
Brian Owens and Georgia Department of Corrections
Crawford v. United States of America
as 12-3943
Plaintiff - Appellant:
Lawrence L. Crawford
Defendant - Appellee:
United States of America, Sovereign State, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, Sovereign State, Great Britain, Sovereign State and others
Barber v. Polk County Sheriff's Office
as 8:2012cv00425
Plaintiff:
Franklin Lee Barber, III
Defendant:
Polk County Sheriff's Office
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Crawford v. United States et al
as 9:2011cv01437
Plaintiff:
Lawrence L. Crawford
Defendant:
United States, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, Great Britain and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Kelley v. McCall et al
as 3:2009cv03133
Petitioner:
Myron Kelley
Respondent:
Michael McCall, Cynthia M Nelson, James R Barber, III and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
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.
