Cases 1 - 10 of 23
Johnson v. Town of Monks Corner et al
as 2:2022cv01370
Plaintiff:
Shayla D. Johnson
Defendant:
Town of Monks Corner, Berkeley County Sheriff's Department, Officer D. Rumph and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights, State Filers
Monk v. Hooks
as 5:2019hc02045
Respondent:
Erik A. Hooks
Petitioner:
Isaac Sherrill Monk
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Monk v. Maryland State Police NE Barracks et al
as 1:2018cv02215
Defendant:
Maryland State Police NE Barracks, Cecil County State Attorneys Office and Investigators
Plaintiff:
Alishawaine Raheen Monk, Christopher Woodberry, Tina Robertson and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr
Monk v. Mosley
as 5:2017cv02198
Petitioner:
Terry Dewayne Monk
Respondent:
B Mosley
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241
Sherrod et al v. Doe et al
as 5:2016ct03153
Plaintiff:
Marion L. Sherrod and Jevon Monk
Defendant:
John Doe, George T. Solomon, Superintendent Daniels and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Casey Tyler v. Carlton Joyner
as 15-6040
Plaintiff - Appellant:
CASEY RAFAEL TYLER
Defendant - Appellee:
CARLTON B. JOYNER, MARSHALL PIKE, FREDERICK STRICKLAND and others
Tyler v. Joyner et al
as 5:2014ct03044
Plaintiff:
Casey Rafael Tyler
Defendant:
Carlton B. Joyner, Marshall Pike, Frederick Strickland and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1983
Camacho et al v. Graff et al
as 2:2013cv00997
Plaintiff:
Agustin Esparza Camacho and Maria Susana Leon
Defendant:
Cody Graff , Ray Barwick , Monks Corner Police Department, The and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1343 Violation of Civil Rights
Rhodes v. Monk
as 7:2011cv00366
Defendant:
Monk
Plaintiff:
Paul Rhodes
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Farrakhan v. Johnson et al
as 7:2011cv00185
Defendant:
K. Austin, Sgt. Baily, Mrs. Ball and others
Plaintiff:
Shaka Amir Farrakhan
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
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.
