Cases 21 - 30 of 225
Serratt v. Riley et al (INMATE 1)
as 2:2018cv00478
Plaintiff:
Girlis Hugh Serratt
Defendant:
Bob Riley, Troy King, Kim Thomas and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Mark Baine v. Richard Allen, et al
as 17-13642
Plaintiff - Appellant:
MARK A. BAINE
Defendant - Appellee:
RICHARD ALLEN, KIM THOMAS, BILLY MITCHUM and others
Baine v. Allen et al
as 5:2017cv01023
Plaintiff:
Mark Anthony Baine
Defendant:
Richard Allen, Kim Thomas, Billy Mitchum and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
McGregor v. Thomas et al
as 4:2017cv00593
Plaintiff:
Michael McGregor
Defendant:
Kim Thomas, Jefferson Dunn, Grantt Culliver and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Zeller v. Thomas et al
as 4:2017cv00564
Plaintiff:
Anthony Zeller
Defendant:
Kim Thomas , Jefferson Dunn, Grantt Culliver and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Casey v. Thomas et al
as 4:2017cv00563
Plaintiff:
William Casey
Defendant:
Kim Thomas , Jefferson Dunn, Grantt Culliver and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Townsel v. Thomas et al
as 4:2017cv00516
Plaintiff:
Michael Stanley Townsel
Defendant:
Kim Thomas, Jefferson Dunn, Grantt Culliver and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1983
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2016cv02789
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441 Petition for Removal - Employment Discrim
Thomas Hines v. Kim Thomas, et al
as 16-16256
Plaintiff - Appellant:
THOMAS CURTIS HINES
Defendant - Appellee:
KIM THOMAS, WARDEN, CYNTHIA A. WHITE and others
Roy Rutledge v. State of Alabama, et al
as 16-16083
Plaintiff - Appellant:
ROY M. RUTLEDGE
Defendant - Appellee:
STATE OF ALABAMA, KIM THOMAS, in his former individual and official capacities as Commissioner for the Alabama Department of Corrections, COMMISSIONER, ALABAMA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, in his current official capacity as Commissioner for the Alabama Department of Corrections and others
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.
