Cases 1 - 10 of 108
(SS) Lamar v. Commissioner of Social Security
as 1:2024cv00504
Plaintiff:
Jacob David Lamar
Defendant:
Commissioner of Social Security
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 402 Social Security Benefits
Lamar v. Commissioner of Social Security
as 1:2024at00349
Plaintiff:
Jacob David Lamar
Defendant:
Commissioner of Social Security
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 402 Social Security Benefits
Brent Jacoby v. John Hamm, et al
as 24-10574
Plaintiff:
BRENT JACOBY
Defendant:
COMMISSIONER, ALABAMA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, JOHN Q. HAMM, EASTERLING CF WARDEN and others
Jackson-Render v. USA
as 4:2023cv01185
Petitioner:
David Lamar Jackson-Render
Respondent:
USA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255 Motion to Vacate / Correct Illegal Sentence
MARSH v. CLARKE COUNTY JAIL
as 3:2023cv00127
Plaintiff:
DAVID LAMAR MARSH
Defendant:
CLARKE COUNTY JAIL
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Ramaraju ErramrajuIn re: Ramaraju Erramraju
as 23-13340
Petitioner:
In re: RAMARAJU ROM ERRAMRAJU
Respondent:
DAVID LAMAR and ATTORNEY GENERAL, STATE OF ALABAMA
MORRIS v. 3M COMPANY et al
as 9:2023cv13906
Plaintiff:
DAVID LAMAR MORRIS
Defendant:
3M COMPANY, 3M OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY LLC, AEARO HOLDING LLC and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Product Liability
Erramraju v. Lamar et al
as 2:2023cv01272
Petitioner:
Ramaraju Rom Erramraju
Respondent:
David Lamar and Attorney General of the State of Alabama, The
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Cunningham v. Hamm et al (INMATE 2)
as 2:2023cv00564
Plaintiff:
Dewayne Cunningham and Dewayne Scott Cunningham
Defendant:
John Q. Hamm, David Lamar, Lt. Randolph and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Childs v. Lamar et al (INMATE 2)
as 2:2023cv00999
Plaintiff:
Yancey A. Childs
Defendant:
David Lamar and Steven T Marshall
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
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.
