Cases 1 - 10 of 24
Williams v. Kemp et al
as 1:2024cv00965
Plaintiff:
Curtis Andrew Williams
Defendant:
Brian Kemp, Tyrone Oliver, Michael W. Nail and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Garland v. Nail
as 1:2023cv05784
Petitioner:
Lemone Garland
Respondent:
Reginald Scandrett and Michael W. Nail
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Anderson v. Nail
as 6:2023cv00058
Petitioner:
Jonathan Mitchell Anderson
Respondent:
Commissioner Michael W. Nail
Not Classified By Court:
Attorney General State of Georgia (Notice Only)
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
HOWARD v. WARD et al
as 5:2022cv00111
Petitioner:
ERNEST HOWARD
Respondent:
CHIEF JAMES WARD, STATE OF GEORGIA and COMMISSIONER MICHAEL W NAIL
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
REID v. STATE OF GEORGIA et al
as 3:2021cv00099
Petitioner:
RHONDA REID
Respondent:
STATE OF GEORGIA, GREENE COUNTY and MICHAEL W NAIL
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Shields v. Prior et al
as 1:2020cv04844
Defendant:
Michael W. Nail and William A. Prior, Jr.
Plaintiff:
Matthew Donald Shields
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Bradley v. Beckom et al
as 3:2020cv00163
Petitioner:
Austin Zachary Bradley
Respondent:
Carrollton Department of Community Supervision, Michael T. Beckom and Michael W. Nail
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Vincent v. Floyd County Police Department et al
as 1:2020cv03503
Defendant:
Jim McCormick, Richard Matthews, Jeff Jones and others
Plaintiff:
Darren Allan Vincent
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Brooks v. Nail
as 1:2020cv03109
Petitioner:
Derrick Brooks
Respondent:
State of Georgia, Judge John M. Ott and Michael W. Nail
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Lloyd v. Palmer et al
as 1:2019cv03655
Defendant:
Supervison of DCS, Four Field Probation Officers, Frank Nattiel and others
Plaintiff:
Timothy Lloyd
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.
