Cases 11 - 20 of 182
Turner v. Charles B. Webster's Detention Center's Food Services
as 1:2021cv00166
Plaintiff:
Brandon Lydell Turner
Defendant:
Charles B. Webster's Detention Center's Food Services
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Evans v. Roundtree et al
as 1:2021cv00156
Petitioner:
Quint L. Evans
Respondent:
Richard Roundtree, Charles Samuels and Charles B. Webster Detention Center
Not Classified By Court:
Attorney General State of Georgia (Notice Only)
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2021cv03466
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1681
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2021cv03433
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1681
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 4:2021cv00135
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990
Evans v. Roundtree et al
as 1:2020cv00153
Defendant:
Warden Charles Samuels, Charles B. Webster Detention Center and Sheriff Richard Roundtree
Plaintiff:
Quint L. Evans
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Kontrolfreek, LLC v. Webster et al
as 1:2020cv03882
Defendant:
Jacques Webster, Cactus Jack Enterprises, LLC, Cactus Jack Records LLC and others
Plaintiff:
Kontrolfreek, LLC
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1338
Thompson v. Charles B. Webster Detention Center
as 1:2020cv00121
Defendant:
Officer Chaput, Officer Hines and Charles B. Webster Detention Center
Plaintiff:
Chauncey V. Thompson, III
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Patton v. Ethicon, Inc. et al
as 1:2020cv02145
Defendant:
Ethicon, Inc. and Johnson & Johnson
Plaintiff:
Webster Patton
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2020cv01921
Debtor:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Appellant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Appellee:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 0158
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.
