Cases 1 - 9 of 9
Adamson et al v. D'Amore et al
as 9:2023cv01304
Plaintiff:
David Adamson, Henry Barrera, James Caruso and others
Defendant:
Michael D'Amore, Danielle C. Medbury, William S. Dawson and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Huricks v. Sumner et al
as 9:2023cv00064
Plaintiff:
Timothy Donald Huricks
Respondent:
Misty Sumner, Angie Cargill, Elizabeth Miller and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Payne v. State of Texas et al
as 5:2022cv00938
Plaintiff:
Christopher Jarvis Payne
Defendant:
State of Texas, BCADC, Pre-Trial Bond Officer 1 [43820], in and for the State of Texas and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Jackson v. Uhler
as 9:2022cv00496
Petitioner:
Bobby Jackson
Respondent:
Donald Uhler
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Orozco v. Leighton et al
as 1:2015cv08043
Plaintiff:
Victor Orozco
Defendant:
Edward Leighton, Dan Palluk, Raddatz and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Daniel Dumonde v. R. Anderson, III
as 08-5369
Plaintiff - Appellant:
Daniel Lafitte Dumonde
Defendant - Appellee:
R. Lanier Anderson, III, Judge, U.S. Eleventh Circuit, Michael B. Billingsley, Assistant U.S. Attorney, Sharon Lovelace Blackburn, Chief Judge, U.S. District Court, Alabama and others
Dumonde v. State of Alabama et al (INMATE 2)
as 2:2008cv00431
Plaintiff:
Daniel Lafitte Dumonde
Defendant:
State of Alabama, State of Alabama, United States and others
Cause Of Action: U.S. Government Defendant
DUMONDE v. ANDERSON et al
as 1:2007cv00715
Plaintiff:
DANIEL LAFITTE DUMONDE
Defendant:
R. LANIER ANDERSON, III, MICHAEL B. BILLINGSLEY, SHARON LOVELACE BLACKBURN and others
Cause Of Action: 18 U.S.C. § 1964 Racketeering (RICO) Act
Jackson v. Williamson
as 3:2007cv00544
Petitioner:
Bobby Jackson
Respondent:
Troy Williamson and Troy Williamson
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
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.
