Cases 1 - 10 of 100
Davis v. Calhoun
as 3:2026cv00477
Plaintiff:
Danthony Larome Davis
Defendant:
Major Ward Calhoun
Interested Party:
Pro Se Department
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Federal)
Wilkins v. Calhoun
as 3:2026cv00475
Plaintiff:
James Michael Wilkins
Defendant:
Sheriff Ward Calhoun
Interested Party:
Pro Se Department
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Federal)
Calhoun v. CarMax
as 26-30405
Plaintiff:
Naya Calhoun
Defendant:
CarMax Business Services, L.L.C., doing business as CarMax Auto Finance
Hudson v. Sheriff Ward Calhoun
as 3:2026cv00474
Plaintiff:
Fredrick Shawna Hudson
Defendant:
Sheriff Ward Calhoun
Interested Party:
Pro Se Department
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Federal)
CALHOUN COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT v. Meta Platforms, Inc et al
as 3:2026cv06416
Plaintiff:
CALHOUN COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT
Defendant:
Meta Platforms, Inc, Instagram, LLC, Facebook Payments Inc. and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Product Liability
Calhoun v. Warson Group Inc et al
as 3:2026cv02114
Unknown:
Warson Group, Inc., True Value Distribution Center, Reebok International Limited
Plaintiff:
Johnnie Calhoun
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1446 Notice of Removal
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 5:2026cv00167
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000 e Job Discrimination (Employment)
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2026cv01892
Petitioner:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 8 U.S.C. § 1105 (a) Aliens: Habeas Corpus to Release INS Det
Warren Calhoun, Jr.In re: Warren Calhoun, Jr.
as 26-10554
Petitioner:
In re: Warren Tyrone Calhoun, Jr.
Rihanna Pointer, et al v. Scott Phelps, et al
as 26-12085
Plaintiff:
RIHANNA POINTER, GRANT STURDIVANT, TIMONI TAITE and others
Defendant:
SCOTT PHELPS, MIKE BROCK, KAREN BROOKS and others
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.
