Cases 81 - 90 of 155
Ray v. Dillard et al (INMATE 1)
as 2:2015cv00518
Plaintiff:
Robert Earl Ray, Jr.
Defendant:
Cynthia Dillard, Nancy McCreary, William Wynn and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Williams v. City of Birmingham et al
as 2:2015cv00949
Plaintiff:
Lameco M. Williams
Defendant:
City of Birmingham, Nathan Elmore, Jeffery Sanders and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2015cv00383
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
McDonald v. Progressive Specialty Insurance Company
as 1:2015cv00158
Plaintiff:
Margaret Turner McDonald
Defendant:
Progressive Specialty Insurance Company
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Avery v. United States Department of the Air Force et al
as 7:2015cv00419
Plaintiff:
Michael Anthony Avery
Defendant:
United States Department of the Air Force, Deborah Lee James and Robert A McDonald
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
McDonald et al v. Actavis, Inc. et al
as 1:2015cv00097
Plaintiff:
John E. McDonald, Jr. and Helen McDonald
Defendant:
Actavis, Inc., Watson Pharmaceuticals, Inc. and Pfizer, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
McDonald v. Credit Protection Association, L.P.
as 1:2015cv00003
Plaintiff:
Eddie McDonald
Defendant:
Credit Protection Association, L.P.
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1692
Strange v. McDonald Oil Company, Inc.
as 1:2014cv00425
Plaintiff:
Melton Strange
Defendant:
McDonald Oil Company, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Washington v. McDonald et al (INMATE 2)
as 2:2014cv00947
Plaintiff:
Eric D. Washington
Defendant:
Michael McDonald and Jason M. Ford
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Caffey et al v. Ocwen Federal Bank et al
as 5:2014cv01686
Plaintiff:
Sherryl Caffey and Brett Caffey
Defendant:
Ocwen Federal Bank , Ocwen Financial Corporation, Ocwen Mortgage Company and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441
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.
