Cases 1 - 10 of 13
Ramirez-Rivera v. Ray
as 3:2023cv00126
Petitioner:
Rafael Ramirez-Rivera
Respondent:
Heather Ray
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Federal)
Ramirez v. Brown
as 5:2023cv00160
Petitioner:
Juan Ramirez
Respondent:
Warden Brown
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Federal)
Ramirez Rodriguez v. Brown
as 5:2023cv00155
Petitioner:
Jose Miguel Ramirez Rodriguez
Respondent:
R. Brown
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Federal)
Ramirez-Rodriguez v. Wolfe
as 3:2022cv00146
Petitioner:
Jose M. Ramirez-Rodriguez
Respondent:
R. Wolfe
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Federal)
Ramirez Benitez et al v. Las Trancas of Martinsburg, Inc. et al
as 3:2017cv00011
Plaintiff:
Alejandro Ramirez Benitez and Rey Ramirez Benitez
Defendant:
Las Trancas of Martinsburg, Inc., El Ranchero of Hagerstown II, Inc. and Jose Humberto Munoz
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 201
Muhammad v Heady et al
as 1:2014cv00088
Plaintiff:
Abdul-Aziz Rashid Muhammad
Defendant:
Dane Heady, Michael Weaver, Eddie Anderson and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
Marshall v. Mouse et al
as 5:2010cv00052
Plaintiff:
La'Ron Marshall
Defendant:
Andrew Mouse, Robert Malone, Athanasios Paliotheodoros and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
Ramirez v. Holder et al
as 1:2010cv00018
Plaintiff:
Jose Ramirez
Defendant:
Eric Holder and Harley Lappin
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Federal Question: Bivens Act
Sturdevant et al v. Holder et al
as 1:2009cv00142
Plaintiff:
Norbert Sturdevant and Jose Ramirez
Defendant:
Eric Holder and Harley Lappin
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Federal Question: Bivens Act
Ramirez v. Mace et al
as 5:2009cv00092
Plaintiff:
Cosme Sanchez Ramirez
Defendant:
Dr. Mace and Kuma Deboo
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.
