Cases 11 - 20 of 63
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
Smith v. Dillard et al (INMATE 2)
as 2:2015cv00209
Plaintiff:
Arnetra Smith
Defendant:
Cynthia Dillard, Donald Campbell, Bill Wynne and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Tullis v. State of Alabama et al (INMATE 1)
as 2:2015cv00095
Plaintiff:
Lisa McKinley Tullis
Defendant:
State of Alabama, Ray Wiehe, Kim Turner and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Dillard v. Boston Scientific Corp.
as 2:2014cv26653
Plaintiff:
Cynthia Dillard
Defendant:
Boston Scientific Corp.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Perry v. Wynn et al (INMATE 1)
as 2:2014cv00992
Plaintiff:
Jimmy Lee Perry
Defendant:
Bill Wynn, Cliff Walker, Robert Longshore and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
DILLARD v. BOSTON SCIENTIFIC CORP. et al
as 2:2014cv05351
Plaintiff:
CYNTHIA DILLARD
Defendant:
BOSTON SCIENTIFIC CORP.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Guthrie v. Alabama Board of Pardon & Paroles et al (INMATE 2)
as 2:2014cv00716
Plaintiff:
Christopher W. Guthrie
Defendant:
Alabama Board of Pardon & Paroles, Cynthia Dillard, Eddie Cook, Jr. and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Dillard v. Boston Scientific Corp. et al
as 2:2014cv00018
Plaintiff:
Cynthia Dillard
Defendant:
Boston Scientific Corp. , Secant Medical, Secant Medical, Inc. and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Sears v. Alabama Board of Pardons and Paroles et al (INMATE 1)
as 2:2013cv00911
Plaintiff:
Timothy Allen Sears
Defendant:
Alabama Board of Pardons and Paroles, Cynthia Dillard, Ms. King and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Turner v. Dillard, et al. (INMATE 2)
as 2:2013cv00904
Plaintiff:
Willie J. Turner
Defendant:
Cynthia Dillard and Alabama Board of Pardons and Paroles
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.
