Cases 31 - 40 of 49
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2013cv00105
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1981 Civil Rights
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2012cv00635
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2011mc03594
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2011cv00045
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000
Jordan v. State of Alabama Department of Corrections (INMATE 1)
as 2:2010cv00968
Plaintiff:
James T. Jordan
Defendant:
State of Alabama Department of Corrections
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2010cv00841
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000
Moss v. State of Alabama, Department of Corrections et al
as 2:2010cv00766
Plaintiff:
Cesar Moss
Defendant:
State of Alabama, Department of Corrections, Richard F. Allen, Arnold Holt and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000
Flournoy v. State of Alabama Department of Corrections et al (INMATE 2)
as 1:2010cv00144
Plaintiff:
Donnell Flournoy
Defendant:
State of Alabama Department of Corrections, Keith Reed and Troy King
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Young v. State of Alabama Department of Corrections
as 7:2009cv02412
Plaintiff:
Ricky James Young
Defendant:
State of Alabama Department of Corrections
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Shropshire v. State of Alabama Department of Corrections et al
as 4:2009cv01391
Petitioner:
Donnie Earl Shropshire
Respondent:
State of Alabama Department of Corrections and Attorney General of the State of Alabama, The
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.
