Cases 51 - 60 of 135
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2017cv00561
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000
Moss v. Randolph County Jail et al (INMATE 2)
as 3:2017cv00557
Plaintiff:
Timothy L. Moss
Defendant:
Randolph County Jail, Alexander Phillip, Cirby Bassit and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Hyshaw v. Whitly et al (INMATE 2)
as 2:2017cv00516
Plaintiff:
Anthony Hyshaw
Defendant:
Lieutenant Whitly, Officer Parham, Officer Williams and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Carpenter v. Hannah et al
as 2:2017cv01211
Plaintiff:
Tammy Murphy Carpenter
Defendant:
Frankie Hannah, Keith Crofford, Harold Randolph and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Howard v. Randolph (INMATE 1)
as 2:2017cv00479
Plaintiff:
Lamarcus Jamaine Howard
Defendant:
Sgt. Randolph
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2017cv00258
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000
Spangler v. Johnson et al (INMATE 1)
as 2:2017cv00001
Defendant:
K Johnson, Officer Ivey, Officer Broadnax and others
Plaintiff:
Marcus Montez Spangler
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Garrett v. Randolph County Sheriff's Department et al (INMATE 2)
as 3:2016cv00990
Plaintiff:
Larry Dean Garrett, Jr.
Defendant:
Randolph County Sheriff's Department, Donnie Strain and Krista Traylor
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Auto-Owners Insurance Company v. Broadsouth Communications, Inc. et al
as 2:2016cv00613
Plaintiff:
Auto-Owners Insurance Company
Defendant:
Broadsouth Communications, Inc., Randolph Williams and Synethis Pettaway
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2201
Garrett v. Randolph County Sheriff Department et al
as 2:2016cv01717
Plaintiff:
Larry Dean Garrett, Jr
Defendant:
Randolph County Sheriff Department, Krista Traylor and Donnie Strain
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
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.
