Cases 1 - 9 of 9
Walker v. Limestone Correctional Facility et al (INMATE 3)
as 5:2024cv00035
Plaintiff:
Gene Walker
Defendant:
Limestone Correctional Facility, Deborah Toney and Officer Billingsley
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Walker v. Lumpkin
as 4:2023cv04775
Petitioner:
Michael Gene Walker
Respondent:
Bobby Lumpkin
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Walker v. Limestone Correctional Facility et al (INMATE 3)
as 2:2023cv00459
Plaintiff:
Gene Walker
Defendant:
Limestone Correctional Facility, Deborah Toney and Officer Billingsley
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Walker et al v. C R Bard Incorporated et al
as 2:2021cv01199
Defendant:
C R Bard Incorporated and Bard Peripheral Vascular Incorporated
Plaintiff:
Heather Walker and Gene Walker
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Product Liability
Walker et al v. C R Bard Incorporated et al
as 2:2019cv03707
Defendant:
C R Bard Incorporated and Bard Peripheral Vascular Incorporated
Plaintiff:
Heather Walker and Gene Walker
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Modern Holdings, LLC, et al v Corning Incorporated, et al
as 5:2019cv00182
Plaintiff:
David Caldwell, Clyde Simpson, Steven Coffman and others
Defendant:
City of Danville Kentucky, Philips Electronics North America Corporation, John Does and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1446
Walker v. Crews
as 4:2012cv00034
Petitioner:
Ray Gene Walker
Respondent:
Cookie Crews
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Smith, et al v. Clark, et al
as 3:2001cv00855
Plaintiff:
John Robert Smith , Shirley Hall and Gene Walker
Defendant:
Eric Clark , Mike Moore , Ronnie Musgrove and others
Intervenor_defendant:
Beatrice J. Branch , Rims Barber , L C Dorsey and others
Movant:
Jimmy D. Giles and Kenneth J. Goodwin
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1343
Roy Gene Walker, Sr. v. ACandS, Inc., et al.
as NCM/1:00-CV-00593
Defendant:
ACandS, Inc
Plaintiff:
Roy Gene Walker, Sr.
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.
