US District Court for the District of Maryland Prisoner Petitions Cases
Cases 1 - 10 of 16,931
Rahman v. Nines et al
as 1:2023cv03260
Plaintiff:
Raheem Rahman
Defendant:
J. Nines, Tames, Yes Care and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr Prisoner Civil Rights
Keyser v. Epps et al
as 1:2023cv03030
Plaintiff:
Richard Keyser
Defendant:
Antonio Epps and King
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr Prisoner Civil Rights
Brightwell v. Kasahun et al
as 1:2023cv03189
Plaintiff:
David Brightwell
Defendant:
Temesgen MD Kasahun, JCI Hospital Administrator, Agonafir MD Michael and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr Prisoner Civil Rights
Cox v. Carter
as 1:2023cv03228
Plaintiff:
Nicholas S. Cox
Defendant:
Crystal Carter
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr Prisoner Civil Rights
Longstreet v. Blankey et al
as 1:2023cv03187
Plaintiff:
Wysan Raheen Longstreet
Defendant:
Shane Blankey and Wells
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr Prisoner Civil Rights
Carlton v. Warden
as 1:2023cv03226
Plaintiff:
Valerie Liane Carlton
Defendant:
Warden
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr Prisoner Civil Rights
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2023cv03217
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 08 U.S.C. § 1329 Immigration: Writ of Mandamus to Adjudicate Visa Petition
Sterling v. State of Maryland
as 1:2023cv03229
Petitioner:
Gregory David Sterling, Sr.
Respondent:
State of Maryland
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2023cv03232
Petitioner:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Respondent:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2023cv03205
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 8 U.S.C. § 1255 Immigration: Failure USCIS To Adjudicate Permanent Residency Petition
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.
