Cases 41 - 50 of 84
McArthur v. Unum Life Insurance Company of America
as 7:2013cv02042
Plaintiff:
Clyde McArthur
Defendant:
Unum Life Insurance Company of America
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 1132
Snell v. Daniels et al (INMATE 1)
as 2:2012cv01075
Plaintiff:
Ronald Clyde Snell
Defendant:
Leeposey Daniels, Charles McKee, Althea Jones and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Burke v. City of Prattville, Alabama et al
as 2:2012cv01017
Plaintiff:
Ken Burke
Defendant:
City of Prattville, Alabama, Bill Gillespie, Terry Brown and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Frazier v. Crawford, et al (INMATE 1)
as 3:2012cv01000
Plaintiff:
Edward Frazier
Defendant:
Thomas A. Crawford, Clyde Knowlton, Robert J. Sewell and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Bradford v. Mitchem et al
as 1:2012cv03726
Petitioner:
William Clyde Bradford
Respondent:
Billy Mitchem and Attorney General of the State of Alabama, The
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Markham v. Books-A-Million Inc et al
as 2:2012cv03526
Plaintiff:
Douglas G Markham
Defendant:
Books-A-Million Inc , Clyde B Anderson and Terrance G Finley
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question: Employment Discrimination
Williams v. Jones et al
as 5:2012cv02491
Plaintiff:
Derrick Lavell Williams
Defendant:
Clyde E Jones, Brandon K Falls, Anne Marie Adams and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Suggs v. Baldwin County Mental Health Center
as 1:2012cv00456
Plaintiff:
Calvin Earl Suggs, Jr.
Defendant:
Baldwin County Mental Health Center, Dr. Cummins and Clyde Rouse
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Shelton v. Jackson et al
as 6:2012cv02204
Plaintiff:
Latonvia Shelton
Defendant:
John Jackson, Chris Edwards, Hezekiah Walker and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Lee v. Driver
as 6:2012cv01707
Plaintiff:
Kimberly Neal Lee
Defendant:
Clyde Driver
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
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.
