Cases 41 - 50 of 107
Footes v. Neverdon et al
as 8:2019cv03178
Defendant:
State of Maryland Office of the Attorney General, Department of Public Safety & Correctional Services, Secratary of the Department of Public Safety and Correctional Services and others
Plaintiff:
Aaron Devon Footes
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr
Passalagua v. Bell et al
as 8:2019cv02940
Defendant:
T. Gera, Foote, Hamilton and others
Plaintiff:
Joe Passalagua
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr
Crisantos v. Moubarek et al
as 1:2019cv02932
Defendant:
Warden J. R. Bell, Shobe, Felix and others
Plaintiff:
Benjamin Crisantos
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr
Pirtle v. Bullock et al
as 4:2018cv02101
Defendant:
Ray Foot, Trent Franklin, Scott Miller and others
Plaintiff:
Nicholas Ray Pirtle
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Thompson v. Foote
as 2:2018cv04700
Plaintiff:
Richard Wayne Thompson
Defendant:
Sam Foote
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Footes v. Bishop et al
as 8:2018cv03214
Defendant:
Officer W. Bohrer, Officer W. Iser, R. Roderick and others
Plaintiff:
Aaron Devon Footes
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr
Foote v. Degenhardt
as 3:2018cv00530
Defendant:
Deputy Daniel Degenhardt
Plaintiff:
Zachary Nathaniel Foote
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Footes v. Bishop et al
as 8:2017cv01192
Plaintiff:
Aaron Devon Footes
Defendant:
Frank B. Bishop, Jr., Mary S. Johnson and J. McMahan
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Davis v. GEO Group Corrections, et al
as 17-6059
Plaintiff - Appellant:
EZEKIEL DAVIS
Defendant - Appellee:
GEO GROUP CORRECTIONS, INC., AMBER MARTIN, Vice President of GEO Group, Inc., individually and in her official capacity, HECTOR RIOS, JR., Warden, individually and in his official capacity and others
Riley v. Stewart et al
as 1:2017cv00037
Plaintiff:
Tony D. Riley
Defendant:
Mrs. Hamilton, Mrs. Foote, Mrs. Crites and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
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.
