Cases 41 - 50 of 54
Williams v. Maye et al
as 5:2012cv00032
Petitioner:
Franklin L. Williams
Respondent:
C. Maye and Thurbert Baker
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Sampson v. Reed et al
as 1:2012cv00500
Plaintiff:
Ricky J. Sampson
Defendant:
Kasim Reed, Cayenne Mayes, Robert C. Godwin and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 4:2011cv00247
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1981
Burkes et al v. Reed et al
as 1:2011cv03399
Plaintiff:
Elton Burkes , Maury Girard , Scott Haeberlin and others
Defendant:
Kasim Reed , Willie Adams, III , Bennie E. Bridges and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1443
Walker et al v. Reed et al
as 1:2011cv03334
Plaintiff:
Jason Walker , Kacy Daniel , Antonio Daniel and others
Defendant:
Kasim Reed, Stalone Davis, Brandon Jackson and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Maye v. Haynes
as 2:2011cv00059
Petitioner:
Charles Daniel Maye
Respondent:
Anthony Haynes
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241
Tanner et al v. Cobb County, Georgia et al
as 1:2010cv02023
Plaintiff:
Tonnie D. Tanner and Billy Mayes Kennedy
Defendant:
Cobb County, Georgia and Daniel P. Rogers
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Timeless Entertainment Concepts, LLC v. DMOT Management Group, LLC et al
as 1:2010cv00329
Plaintiff:
Timeless Entertainment Concepts, LLC
Defendant:
DMOT Management Group, LLC, Ideas Unlimited, LLC, Chris Williams and others
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2010cv00284
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Petitioner:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1981 Race Discrimination
Serpentfoot v. Rome City Commission et al
as 4:2009cv00187
Plaintiff:
Serpentfoot
Defendant:
Rome City Commission, Rome City Commission, Wright Bagby and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Type:
Other Statutes
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.
