Cases 41 - 50 of 2,932
Groseclose v. Lee Arrendale State Prison Administration et al
as 2:2024cv00166
Defendant:
Lee Arrendale State Prison Administration, Warden Carmen Edwards, Counselor B. Wells and others
Plaintiff:
Angela Elizabeth Groseclose
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2024cv03156
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1692 Fair Debt Collection Act
Jones v. Raybun et al
as 1:2024cv00112
Plaintiff:
Dawud Bashan Jones
Defendant:
Christopher Rabun and Kenneth E. Atterton
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Daker v. Jones et al
as 4:2024cv00173
Defendant:
Counselor FNU Couch, Captain Scott Lowe, Lieutenant FNU Stewart and others
Plaintiff:
Waseem Daker
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
TAYLOR v. KEMP et al
as 4:2024cv00105
Defendant:
Commissioner TYRONE OLIVER, Deputy Warden LETITIA BURKS, Warden DESHAWN JONES and others
Plaintiff:
CHARLES MYRON TAYLOR, II
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
PICKETT v. ROSS, et al
as 5:2024cv00229
Defendant:
UNIT MANAGER TROUTMAN, SGT ROSS, DEPUTY WARDEN JEFFERIES and others
Plaintiff:
SHANNON WAYNE PICKETT
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2024cv03030
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1681 Fair Credit Reporting Act
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2024cv03035
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1692 Fair Debt Collection Act
Horton v. Jones
as 6:2024cv00036
Petitioner:
Quentin Horton
Respondent:
Joshua Jones
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
JONES v. ODOM
as 1:2024cv00099
Respondent:
WARDEN ROY ODUM
Petitioner:
EMORY T. JONES
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
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.
