Cases 11 - 20 of 51
Timothy Richards v. John Cummins, et al
as 10-13391
Petitioner - Appellant:
TIMOTHY J RICHARDS
Respondent - Appellee:
JOHN CUMMINS and ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF ALABAMA
Stallworth v. Chatman et al
as 1:2010cv00389
Plaintiff:
Kinwen LaMarrow Stallworth
Defendant:
William Tommy Chatman, Thomas Tate, Judge Donhare and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Calhoun v. Cummins et al
as 1:2010cv01978
Petitioner:
Leander Calhoun
Respondent:
John Cummins and Attorney General of State of Alabama, The
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Santana v. Cummins et al (INMATE1)
as 1:2010cv00493
Plaintiff:
Eliezer Santana
Defendant:
John Cummins and Troy King
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Stallworth v. Kilby Correctional Facility et al (INMATE2)
as 2:2010cv00469
Plaintiff:
Kinwen LaMarrow Stallworth
Defendant:
Kilby Correctional Facility, John Cummins and Shirley Rogers
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Larkin v. King et al (INMATE1)
as 2:2010cv00460
Plaintiff:
Adam Paul Larkin
Defendant:
Troy King, Richard F. Allen and John Cummins
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Edwards v. Cummins et al (INMATE 1)
as 2:2010cv00452
Plaintiff:
Richard W. Edwards
Defendant:
John Cummins, Correctional Medical Services, Doctor Robbins and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Stallworth v. Chatman et al (INMATE2)
as 2:2010cv00351
Plaintiff:
Kinwen LaMarrow Stallworth
Defendant:
William Tommy Chatman, Thomas Tate, Judge Donhare and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Richards v. Cummins et al
as 6:2010cv00899
Petitioner:
Timothy J Richards
Respondent:
John Cummins and Attorney General of the State of Alabama, The
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Nava et al v. Cummins et al
as 1:2010cv00165
Petitioner:
Salvador Nava
Respondent:
John Cummins and Troy King
Movant:
Raul Perez, Jr.
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.
