Cases 31 - 40 of 66,979
Davis v. West et al
as 6:2024cv00024
Plaintiff:
Louis Davis
Defendant:
Warden Mr. West and Brinden Murry
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
DAVIS v. MONROE et al
as 7:2024cv00050
Plaintiff:
SHELAINE V DAVIS
Defendant:
JUDGE MATT MONROE, JUSTO CABRAL, VALDOSTA POLICE DEPARTMENT and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1981 Civil Rights
HOLLINGSHED v. DAVIS et al
as 5:2024cv00151
Plaintiff:
GARY HOLLINGSHED
Defendant:
SHERIFF DAVID DAVIS and AMBER COOK
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Davis v. American Senior Communities, LLC
as 1:2024cv00199
Plaintiff:
Joshua Davis
Defendant:
American Senior Communities, LLC
Cause Of Action: 05 U.S.C. § 7703 Discrimination - Review of Agency Act
Davis v. Payne
as 5:2024cv03074
Petitioner:
Matthew Evan Davis, Sr.
Respondent:
Kevin Payne
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
Whitehead et al v. Quality Carriers, Inc. et al
as 4:2024cv01864
Plaintiff:
Nya Chanel Whitehead and Nya Chanel Whithead, Individually a/n/f of J.T. and A.T., Minor Children
Defendant:
Quality Carriers, Inc. and Darrell Davis
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441 Notice of Removal
Incorrectly Filed
as 3:2024cv00134
Plaintiff:
Kendall Merriweather
Defendant:
Mark Davis
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Merriweather v. Davis
as 3:2024cv00135
Plaintiff:
Kendall Merriweather
Defendant:
Mark Davis
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1981 Civil Rights
Alvarez v. Lumpkin et al
as 1:2024cv00180
Plaintiff:
Edwing Ahmed Alvarez
Defendant:
Bobby Lumpkin, Timothy Fitzpatrick, Christopher L Norsworthy and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Alvarez v. Lumpkin et al
as 1:2024cv00181
Plaintiff:
Edwing Ahmed Alvarez
Defendant:
Bobby Lumpkin, Timothy Fitzpatrick, Angela N Chevalier and others
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.
