Cases 1 - 10 of 1,451
Broyles v. Bruce
as 1:2024cv00110
Plaintiff:
Scottie Broyles
Defendant:
Sgt. Johnny Bruce
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr Prisoner Civil Rights
Santos v. Holloway et al
as 5:2024cv03328
Petitioner:
Eliseo Santos
Respondent:
Ryan Holloway and Scotty Bodiford
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (County)
Santos v. Holloway et al
as 6:2024cv03328
Petitioner:
Eliseo Santos
Respondent:
Ryan Holloway and Scotty Bodiford
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (County)
Carpenter v. Davol, Inc. et al
as 2:2024cv02523
Plaintiff:
Scottie Carpenter
Defendant:
Davol, Inc. and C.R. Bard, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Product Liability
JENKINS v. WALMART et al
as 3:2024cv00207
Plaintiff:
SCOTTIE BERNARD JENKINS
Defendant:
WALMART and BRANDON GARRISON
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2024cv00396
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 451 Employment Discrimination
Haydel et al v. Ocean Harbor Casualty Insurance Company
as 2:2024cv01209
Plaintiff:
Gregory Haydel, Jr. and Scotti Haydel
Defendant:
Ocean Harbor Casualty Insurance Company
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Insurance Contract
Gesell v. Cottonwood, City of et al
as 3:2024cv08090
Plaintiff:
Stephen Gesell
Defendant:
Cottonwood, City of, Tim Elinski, Jesus Rodriguez and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441 Petition for Removal- Civil Rights Act
Van Hawk v. Indiana Attorney General
as 3:2024cv00259
Petitioner:
Scotty Lee Van Hawk and Scotty Van Hawk
Respondent:
Indiana Attorney General
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Moss v. McClain
as 5:2024cv00584
Petitioner:
Scotty Dale Moss
Respondent:
Warden Antonio McClain and Attorney General State of Alabama
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.
