Cases 1 - 10 of 3,106
Sewell v. Maddox et al
as 2:2024cv00338
Plaintiff:
Amy Giles Sewell
Defendant:
Thomas N Maddox, City of Elba, Alabama and Harold L. Staley
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441 Notice of Removal - Civil Rights
Thomas v. American Express National Bank
as 1:2024cv00185
Plaintiff:
Brendon Thomas
Defendant:
American Express National Bank
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Breach of Contract
Williams v. Pelzer et al
as 5:2024cv00706
Plaintiff:
Donderrious Williams
Defendant:
Jeremy Pelzer, Michael Jones, Steven Parker and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2024cv00676
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
East v. Alabama State Board of Pharmacy et al
as 2:2024cv00369
Plaintiff:
Billy Flint East
Defendant:
Alabama State Board of Pharmacy, Donna Conyers Yeatman, James S Ward and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Caldwell v. Hamm et al
as 6:2024cv00268
Plaintiff:
Curtis Caldwell
Defendant:
John Hamm, Dr. Thomas, Scotty Schaffer and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2024cv00266
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 12102 Americans with Disabilities Act ("ADA")
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 5:2024cv00538
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000 Job Discrimination (Age)
Reese v. Huggins et al (INMATE 2)
as 2:2024cv00248
Plaintiff:
Cedric Anthony Reese
Defendant:
Thomas Huggins and Blake Turman
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2024cv00154
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000 e Job Discrimination (Employment)
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.
