Cases 1 - 10 of 25
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
Hatcher v. Bentley et al (INMATE 2)
as 2:2014cv00348
Plaintiff:
Ronald Lee Hatcher
Defendant:
Robert Bentley, Kim Tobias Thomas, James Deloach and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Clegg v. Thomas et al (INMATE 2)
as 2:2013cv00283
Plaintiff:
Jeffrey Scott Clegg
Defendant:
Kim Tobias Thomas, Grant Culliver, Dewayne Estes and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Vaughn v. Alabama Department of Corrections et al (INMATE 1)
as 2:2012cv00955
Plaintiff:
Shaddrick Vaughn
Defendant:
Alabama Department of Corrections, Kathy Holt and Billy Mitchem
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2012cv00569
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1651
Langley v. Mitchem, et al (INMATE 2)
as 2:2012cv00329
Plaintiff:
James Langley
Defendant:
Billy Mitchem and Luther Strange
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Doss v. Mitchem, et al (INMATE 3)
as 2:2011cv00710
Plaintiff:
Billy Gene Doss
Defendant:
Billy Mitchem and Luther Strange
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Martinez v. Mitchem et al (INMATE3)
as 1:2011cv00667
Plaintiff:
George Fidel Martinez
Defendant:
Billy Mitchem and Luther Strange
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Sunday v. Mitchem et al (INMATE1)
as 3:2011cv00544
Plaintiff:
Timothy Lee Sunday
Defendant:
Billy Mitchem and Luther Strange
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Sanderson v. Alabama State Bar Disciplinary Commission et al
as 2:2010cv00878
Plaintiff:
Donald Ray Sanderson
Defendant:
Alabama State Bar Disciplinary Commission, Montgomery County Jail, Robert E. Luske, Jr. and others
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.
