Cases 1 - 10 of 14
Johnson v. Jackson et al
as 2:2020cv01710
Plaintiff:
Aaron Lamont Johnson
Defendant:
John Doe Owner of G Unit Films Corporation, John Doe Owner of ABC 33/40 Corporation, Isiah Wright, Jr and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441
Aaron JohnsonIn re: Aaron Johnson
as 20-14027
Respondent:
ATTORNEY GENERAL STATE OF ALABAMA
Petitioner:
In re: AARON LAMONT JOHNSON
Aaron Johnson v. William Wynne, et al
as 20-10347
Plaintiff / Appellant:
AARON LAMONT JOHNSON
Defendant / Appellee:
CLIFF WALKER, WILLIAM WYNNE and ROBERT LONGSHORE
Aaron Johnson v. T. Anderton, et al
as 20-10246
Plaintiff / Appellant:
AARON LAMONT JOHNSON
Defendant / Appellee:
TRACIE A. TODD, Circuit Judge Jefferson County, T. MICHAEL ANDERTON, D.A. Jefferson County, JACQUELINE ANDERSON SMITH, Clerk Jefferson County Courthouse and others
Johnson v. Anderton et al
as 2:2019cv01707
Plaintiff:
Aaron Lamont Johnson
Defendant:
Tracie A. Todd, Jacqueline Anderson Smith, Michael Streety and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Johnson v. Alabama Board of Pardons and Paroles et al (INMATE 2)
as 2:2016cv00848
Plaintiff:
Aaron Lamont Johnson
Defendant:
Alabama Board of Pardons and Paroles, Phyllis Hill and Shirley Hartly
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Johnson v. Alabama Board of Pardons and Paroles et al
as 2:2016cv01460
Plaintiff:
Aaron Lamont Johnson
Defendant:
Alabama Board of Pardons and Paroles, Phyllis Hill and Shirley Hartly
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Aaron Johnson v. Warden
as 15-13978
Petitioner - Appellant:
AARON LAMONT JOHNSON
Respondent - Appellee:
WARDEN and ATTORNEY GENERAL, STATE OF ALABAMA
In re: Aaron Johnson
as 15-10250
Petitioner:
In re: AARON LAMONT JOHNSON
Successive Habeas Respondent:
ATTORNEY GENERAL, STATE OF ALABAMA
Johnson v. Price et al
as 2:2014cv01513
Petitioner:
Aaron Lamont Johnson
Respondent:
Cheryl Price and Attorney General for the State of Alabama, The
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
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.
