Cases 1 - 10 of 21
Rayford, Jr v. Montgomery County et al
as 3:2024cv00251
Plaintiff:
Larry Rayford, Jr
Defendant:
Montgomery County, Charles S. Bloodworth, Jaclyn M. Bates and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Joe Hand Promotions, Inc. v. Burns
as 2:2023cv02092
Plaintiff:
Joe Hand Promotions, Inc.
Defendant:
Rayford Burns, Annex Pizza & Event Hall and Rayford Burns doing business as Annex Pizza & Event Hall
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question
Rayford v. United States of America
as 2:2022cv02766
Petitioner:
Ariq Rayford
Respondent:
United States of America
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255 Motion to Vacate / Correct Illegal Sentenc
Gates v. Hall
as 2:2019cv02331
Petitioner:
Ercil K. Gates and Ercil K. Rayford
Respondent:
Warden Hilton Hall, Jr. and Hilton Hall, Jr.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Melvin Ingram, et al v. Robert Moore, et al
as 2:2017cv02795
Plaintiff:
Melvin Ingram , Shantel Adams , David Beck and others
Defendant:
Robert Moore , Charlene McGhee , Debra Hammons and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Mountain Laurel Assurance Company v. Wortham et al
as 2:2017cv02660
Plaintiff:
Mountain Laurel Assurance Company
Defendant:
Anthony Wortham, Beverly D Loverson, A.L. and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2201
Mountain Laurel Assurance Company v. Wortham et al
as 2:2017cv02112
Plaintiff:
Mountain Laurel Assurance Company
Defendant:
Anthony Wortham , Beverly D Loverson , Antonio Loverson and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441
Rayford v. Genovese
as 2:2016cv02355
Petitioner:
Ercil K. Rayford
Respondent:
Blair LeiBach
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Rayford v. Genovese
as 3:2016cv00640
Petitioner:
Ercil K. Rayford
Respondent:
Blair Leibach
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Rayford v. Scholfield et al
as 1:2016cv00008
Plaintiff:
Ercil K. Rayford
Defendant:
Derrick Scholfield, Candace Wiseman, Toney Parker and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
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.
