Cases 11 - 20 of 28
BEY v. BUTZBAUGH et al
as 1:2013cv01494
Plaintiff:
YUSUF RAHIM BEY
Defendant:
ALFRED M. BUTZBAUGH, AUTHER J. COTTER, M. LOUISE STINE and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
PATRICK-BEY v. UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT
as 1:2013cv01302
Plaintiff:
WILLIAM PATRICK-BEY
Defendant:
UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
PERRY-BEY et al v. CITY OF NORFOLK VIRGINIA et al
as 1:2013cv00500
Plaintiff:
ROY L. PERRY-BEY and RONALD M. GREEN
Defendant:
CITY OF NORFOLK VIRGINIA, PAUL D. FRAIM, ANTHONY L. BURFORD and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
CLARK-BEY v. STATE OF MARYLAND, et al.,
as 1:2013cv00149
Plaintiff:
AMUN RA CLARK-BEY
Defendant:
STATE OF MARYLAND, MARTIN O'MALLEY, DOUG GANSLER and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
CLARK-BEY v. STATE OF MARYLAND et al
as 1:2013cv00148
Petitioner:
AMUN RA CLARK-BEY
Respondent:
STATE OF MARYLAND, DISTRICT COURT OF MARYLAND FOR PRINCE GEORGE'S COUNTY, BEN C. CLYBURN and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
BEY v. STATE OF MINNESOTA et al
as 1:2012cv01892
Plaintiff:
MARLON TERRELL PRATT BEY
Defendant:
STATE OF MINNESOTA, STEVEN Z. LANGE, THOMAS FABLE and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
BEY v. STATE OF MINNESOTA et al
as 1:2012cv01875
Petitioner:
MARLON TERRELL PRATT BEY
Respondent:
STATE OF MINNESOTA, STEVEN Z. LANGE, THOMAS FABLE and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1361 Petition for Writ of Mandamus
MOHAMMED BEY v. BUSH, et al.,
as 1:2012cv01649
Plaintiff:
ABDUL AYAT MOHAMMED BEY
Defendant:
GEORGE HERBERT WALKER BUSH and GEORGE WALKER BUSH
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
MOHAMMED BEY v. PAM, et al.,
as 1:2012cv00949
Plaintiff:
ABDUL AYAT MOHAMMED BEY
Defendant:
PAM and CATHY LANIER
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
MOHAMMED BEY v. CUBE SMART
as 1:2012cv00212
Plaintiff:
ABDUL AYAT MOHAMMED BEY
Defendant:
CUBE SMART
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.
