Cases 1 - 10 of 35
Burriss et al v. U. S. Supreme Court et al
as 4:2023cv00180
Plaintiff:
Michael Burriss, Raymond Edwards, Melvin Brinson and others
Defendant:
U. S. Supreme Court, U.S. Grand Jury, U.S. Justice Department and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Timothy Boyle v. Warden, Holman CF, et al
as 23-11073
Petitioner / Appellant:
TIMOTHY SCOTT BOYLE
Respondent / Appellee:
HOLMAN CF WARDEN and COMMISSIONER, ALABAMA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS
EDWARDS v. BOYLE et al
as 1:2022cv00227
Plaintiff:
DERRICK M EDWARDS
Defendant:
BOYLE, EADDU, F MOCK and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
SMITH v. PERRY et al
as 5:2022cv00044
Plaintiff:
JR LESTER J SMITH and LESTER J SMITH, JR
Defendant:
WARDEN CLINTON PERRY, DEPUTY WARDEN PETER EADY, TAMAJI SMITH and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
McRoberts v. Wilcher et al
as 4:2021cv00350
Plaintiff:
Joseph McRoberts
Defendant:
Sheriff John Wilcher, Major Boyles and Corporal Boyles
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Davis v. Welcher et al
as 4:2021cv00121
Defendant:
Corporal Boyle, John T. Welcher, Sgt. Walker and others
Plaintiff:
Edward Eugene Davis
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Bell et al v. Welcher et al
as 4:2020cv00302
Defendant:
Captain Blanton, Major Boyles, Captain B. Ervin and others
Plaintiff:
Taurus Myers, Dominique Daniels, Vodie Nathaniel Bell, Jr. and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
BERRY v. BOYLES
as 3:2020cv05465
Defendant:
GRAHAM FOUNTAIN, NATHAN BOYLES and ERIC ESMOND
Plaintiff:
BRANDON RAY SMILEY BERRY
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Boyle v. Dunn
as 4:2018cv01966
Respondent:
Jefferson S Dunn
Petitioner:
Timothy Scott Boyle
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Livingston v. Grossman et al
as 1:2017cv23758
Plaintiff:
Michael Livingston , Jr.
Defendant:
Jonathan Grossman and Elaina Boyle
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.
