Cases 21 - 30 of 38
George v. Headley et al (INMATE 1)
as 2:2014cv01137
Plaintiff:
Michael Wayne George
Defendant:
Joseph Headley, Brian H. Roberts and Sergeant Morris
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
McCollum v. Thomas et al (INMATE 1)
as 2:2014cv00475
Plaintiff:
Michael Wayne McCollum
Defendant:
Kim Tobias Thomas and Christopher Gordy
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Jimerson v. Thomas et al (INMATE 1)
as 2:2014cv00491
Plaintiff:
Michael Wayne Jimerson
Defendant:
Kim Tobias Thomas and Christopher Gordy
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Smith v. Progressive Speciality Insurance Company
as 1:2014cv00489
Plaintiff:
Michael Wayne Smith
Defendant:
Progressive Speciality Insurance Company
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441
Overton v. Social Security Administration, Commissioner
as 5:2014cv00350
Plaintiff:
Michael Wayne Overton
Defendant:
Social Security Administration, Commissioner
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 405
Kelley v. Skechers U.S.A., Inc. et al
as 2:2014cv00123
Plaintiff:
Michael Wayne Kelley
Defendant:
Skechers U.S.A., Inc. and Academy, LTD.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Eggers v. State of Alabama
as 2:2013cv01460
Petitioner:
Michael Wayne Eggers
Respondent:
State of Alabama
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Peppers v. Colvin (CONSENT)
as 2:2013cv00488
Plaintiff:
Michael Wayne Peppers
Defendant:
Carolyn W. Colvin
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 405 Review of HHS Decision (SSID)
Lathers v. Forniss et al
as 1:2013cv00500
Petitioner:
Michael Wayne Lathers
Respondent:
Leon Forniss and Attorney General for the State of Alabama, The
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Eggers v. Alabama Department of Corrections et al
as 2:2012cv03728
Plaintiff:
Michael Wayne Eggers
Defendant:
Alabama Department of Corrections and Cheryl Price
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
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.
