Cases 41 - 50 of 189
Stevenson v. Boyd (INMATE 2)
as 2:2013cv00058
Plaintiff:
James Otis Stevenson
Defendant:
Louis Boyd
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Washington v. Boyd, et al (INMATE 1)
as 2:2013cv00059
Plaintiff:
Marcus Washington
Defendant:
Louis Boyd, Phyllis Billups, Angela Lawson and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Anderson v. Boyd
as 4:2013cv00171
Petitioner:
Hiram Preston Anderson, II
Respondent:
Louis Boyd and Attorney General of State of Alabama, The
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Washington v. Boyd, et al (INMATE 1)
as 2:2013cv00030
Plaintiff:
Marcus Washington
Defendant:
Louis Boyd, Phyllis Billups, Officer Reese and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Stovall v. Boyd et al (INMATE 1)
as 2:2012cv01035
Plaintiff:
Maurice Cartez Stovall
Defendant:
Louis Boyd and Luther Strange
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Skipper v. Boyd, et al (INMATE 2)
as 2:2012cv00949
Plaintiff:
Jesse Wayne Skipper, II
Defendant:
Louis Boyd, Phyllis Billups, Larry Philyaw and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Blair v. Thomas, et al (INMATE 1)
as 2:2012cv00909
Plaintiff:
David Wesley Blair
Defendant:
Kim Tobias Thomas, Jeffrey Williams, Louis Boyd and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Boykins-Bey v. Boyd (INMATE 2)
as 2:2012cv00774
Plaintiff:
Ke'Darrius Quindell Boykins-Bey
Defendant:
Louis Boyd
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Quinn v. Boyd et al(INMATE 1)
as 2:2012cv00601
Plaintiff:
William Quinn
Defendant:
Louis Boyd, Carter F. Davenport, Sgt. Jones and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Noe v. Boyd et al
as 5:2012cv02239
Petitioner:
Woodburck Noe
Respondent:
Louis Boyd, Luther Strange and Alabama Department of Corrections
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
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.
