Cases 31 - 40 of 65
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2022cv00036
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Bryan Blount v. Culliver, et al
as 22-10479
Plaintiff / Appellant:
BRYAN ALEXANDER BLOUNT
Defendant / Appellee:
COMMISSIONER CULLIVER, ANGIE BAGGETT, VIVIAN MCQUEEN and others
Foster v. Ivey et al (INMATE 3)
as 3:2022cv00070
Plaintiff:
Danny Foster, Sr.
Defendant:
Joseph H. Headley, Kay Ivey, Randolph County Circuit Court and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Gilbert v. Headley et al (INMATE 3)
as 1:2022cv00009
Plaintiff:
Gilbert Landale Emanger and Emanger Landale Gilbert
Defendant:
Joseph H. Headley and Steven T. Marshall
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241
Hopson v. State of Alabama et al
as 4:2021cv01594
Petitioner:
Dale Lynn Hopson
Respondent:
State of Alabama, Attorney General State of Alabama and Warden III Joseph H. Headley
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Emanger v. Headley et al
as 1:2021cv00517
Petitioner:
Gilbert Landale Emanger
Respondent:
Joseph H. Headley and Steve Marshall
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241
Givens v. Headley et al (INMATE 3)
as 2:2021cv00611
Plaintiff:
John Henry Givens
Defendant:
Joseph H. Headley and Steven T. Marshall
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Dowdell v. Headley et al (INMATE 3)
as 3:2021cv00588
Plaintiff:
Kirston Jermaine Dowdell
Defendant:
Joseph H. Headley, Steven T. Marshall and State of Alabama
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Jones v. Headley et al
as 7:2021cv00997
Petitioner:
Marcus Alexander Jones
Respondent:
Joseph H Headley and Attorney General of the State of Alabama, The
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Dowdell v. Headley et al (INMATE 3)
as 2:2021cv00588
Plaintiff:
Kirston Jermaine Dowdell
Defendant:
Joseph H. Headley and Steven T. Marshall
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
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.
