Cases 1 - 7 of 7
Norfolk Southern Railway Co. v. Alabama Department of Revenue, et al
as 21-11371
Not Classified By Court:
SERVICE
Plaintiff / Appellee:
NORFOLK SOUTHERN RAILWAY COMPANY, BNSF, AUTAUGA NORTHERN RAILROAD LLC and others
Defendant / Appellant:
CITY OF BIRMINGHAM, ALABAMA, MIKE WRIGHT, Director of Finance of the City of Tuscaloosa, TOMMY OSWALT and others
Norfolk Southern Railway Co., et al v. City of Birmingham, Alabama, et al
as 21-11388
Defendant / Appellant:
TOM BARNETT, Director of Finance of the City of Birmingham and CITY OF BIRMINGHAM, ALABAMA
Plaintiff / Appellee:
NORFOLK SOUTHERN RAILWAY COMPANY, ALABAMA SOUTHERN RAILROAD LLC, BIRMINGHAM TERMINAL RAILWAY LLC and others
City of Birmingham, Alabama v. 3M Company, The et al
as SC/2:21-CV-00606
Plaintiff:
City of Birmingham, Alabama
Defendant:
3M Company, The
Erik Henderson v. City of Birmingham, Alabama
as 20-10521
Defendant / Appellee:
CITY OF BIRMINGHAM, ALABAMA
Plaintiff / Appellant:
ERIK HENDERSON
Mario Martin v. City of Birmingham, Alabama, et al
as 19-11303
Plaintiff / Appellant:
MARIO MARTIN, an individual
Defendant / Appellee:
BIRMINGHAM POLICE DEPARTMENT, DEWAYNE HOWARD, a/k/a Sergeant Dwayne Howard, in his individual and official capacity, CLUB ATLANTIS, aka Atlantis Entertainment and Event Center; aka Atlantis Entertainment Group LLC and others
Mario Martin v. Dewayne Howard
as 19-10944
Defendant / Appellant:
DEWAYNE HOWARD
Plaintiff / Appellee:
MARIO MARTIN
Other:
SERVICE
Defendant / Appellee:
CITY OF BIRMINGHAM, ALABAMA, BIRMINGHAM POLICE DEPARTMENT and CLUB ATLANTIS, aka Atlantis Entertainment and Event Center; aka Atlantis Entertainment Group LLC
Elbow River Marketing Limited Partnership v. Barnett et al
as 2:2015cv00025
Plaintiff:
Elbow River Marketing Limited Partnership
Defendant:
J Thomas Barnett and City of Birmingham, Alabama
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. ยง 1441
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.
