Cases 1 - 10 of 57
Robbins v. Conecuh County, Alabama et al
as 1:2023cv00349
Plaintiff:
Nakita Robbins
Defendant:
Conecuh County, Alabama, Randy Brock, James Ward and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Gaddis v. Benoit et al
as 1:2023cv00309
Plaintiff:
Thomas Gaddis
Defendant:
Pam Benoit, Ray Watts and Toni Rhodes Leeth
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2023cv00007
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights (Employment Discrimination)
Nails v. Dale County Sheriff Department et al (MAG+)
as 1:2022cv00717
Plaintiff:
Angela Denise Nails
Defendant:
Dale County Sheriff Department, Willie Olsan, Barann Elmore and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Baldwin et al v. Reeves et al
as 2:2022cv00686
Plaintiff:
Winford Baldwin, Jr. and Vakela Humphries
Defendant:
Thomas Reeves and PAM Transport, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Tort/Motor Vehicle (P.I.)
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2021cv01658
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2021cv01608
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000 e
Brooks v. City of Southside, Alabama et al
as 4:2021cv00142
Defendant:
Christopher Scott Jones, Etowah County, Alabama, Phillip Roberson and others
Plaintiff:
Adam Brooks
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Willis et al v. Sweet Homelife LLC et al
as 2:2020cv00574
Defendant:
Andrea Quick, Sweet Homelife LLC, Lorie McRee and others
Plaintiff:
Richard Willis and Pam Ganus
Cause Of Action: 47 U.S.C. § 0151 ta
Southern Research Institute v. PAM Innovation Corporation et al
as 2:2019cv00932
Defendant:
Parshu Ram Nirangan Shastri and PAM Innovation Corporation
Plaintiff:
Southern Research Institute
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
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.
