Cases 1 - 10 of 15
The Estate of Joe Nathan James, Jr. v. Ivey et al
as 2:2023cv00293
Plaintiff:
The Estate of Joe Nathan James, Jr.
Defendant:
Kay Ivey, John Q. Hamm, Terry Raybon and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
James v. Raybon et al
as 1:2022cv00285
Plaintiff:
Joe Nathan James, Jr.
Defendant:
Terry Raybon, John Hamm and Steve Marshall
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
James v. Weller, et al
as 1:2022cv00270
Plaintiff:
Joe Nathan James, Jr.
Defendant:
Julia Jordan Weller and Terry Raybon
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
James v. Pettway et al
as 1:2022cv00271
Plaintiff:
Joe Nathan James, Jr.
Defendant:
Mark Pettway and Terry Raybon
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
James v. Raybon et al
as 1:2022cv00252
Plaintiff:
Joe Nathan James, Jr.
Defendant:
Terry Raybon and John Hamm
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
James v. Raybon et al
as 1:2022cv00253
Plaintiff:
Joe Nathan James, Jr.
Defendant:
Terry Raybon, John Hamm, Julia Jordan Weller and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
James v. Marshall
as 1:2022cv00241
Plaintiff:
Joe Nathan James, Jr.
Defendant:
Steve Marshall
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
James v. Federal Defenders Of The Middle District Of Alabama
as 1:2022cv00242
Plaintiff:
Joe Nathan James, Jr.
Defendant:
Federal Defenders Of The Middle District Of Alabama
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
James v. Raybon
as 1:2022cv00152
Petitioner:
Joe Nathan James
Respondent:
Terry Raybon
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
James v. Jefferson County et al
as 1:2022cv00033
Plaintiff:
Joe Nathan James, Jr.
Defendant:
Jefferson County, John Q Hamm, Terry Raybon and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
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.
