Cases 11 - 20 of 33
Neal v. Judge Keith Baynes et al
as 1:2020cv03245
Defendant:
Judge Keith Baynes and Patricia Fitzgerald
Plaintiff:
Troy Neal
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr
Brunson v. USA-2255
as 1:2020cv01465
Petitioner:
Neal A. Brunson
Respondent:
USA-2255
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255
Neale v. Hogan et al
as 1:2020cv01219
Defendant:
Robert L. Greene, Walter Holmes, Boyd K. Rutherford and others
Plaintiff:
Kindall Neale
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr
McDonald v. Bishop et al
as 1:2019cv03380
Plaintiff:
Neal Eugene McDonald
Defendant:
Frank B. Bishop and Holly Pierce
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr
Neal v. The State of Maryland et al
as 8:2019cv00630
Defendant:
The State of Maryland, MCTC Case Management Staff and Warden Richard Dovey
Plaintiff:
Boisey Levern Neal
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr
Neal v. State of Maryland et al
as 8:2018cv03905
Defendant:
State of Maryland, The Attorney General of the State of Maryland and Warden Richard Dovey
Plaintiff:
Boisey Levern Neal
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr
Neal v. Dovey et al
as 8:2018cv03022
Respondent:
The Attorney General Of Maryland and Warden Richard Dovey
Petitioner:
Boisey Levern Neal
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Gaither v. Mrs. Archar et al
as 8:2015cv02734
Plaintiff:
Russell Gaither
Defendant:
Mrs. Archar, Warden Butts, Ms. Cason and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
McDonald v. Maryland Division of Corrections et al
as 1:2015cv02185
Plaintiff:
Neal Eugene McDonald
Defendant:
Maryland Division of Corrections, Maryland Corr. Training Center, Morgan, . and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
McDonald v. Maryland Department of Public Safety & Correctional Services et al
as 1:2014cv02291
Plaintiff:
Neal Eugene McDonald
Defendant:
Maryland Department of Public Safety & Correctional Services, More, Price 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.
