Cases 31 - 40 of 76
Darris Ware v. John Wolfe
as 13-6760
Plaintiff - Appellant:
DARRIS ALARIC WARE
Defendant - Appellee:
JOHN S. WOLFE, Warden, SHALAWNDA SUGGS, Captain, DANIEL A. BICKFORD, Regional Manager MCE and others
Johnson v. Wolfe et al
as 1:2013cv00719
Plaintiff:
Charles Johnson
Defendant:
John S. Wolfe and Allen Gang
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Brader v. Wolfe et al
as 8:2013cv00587
Plaintiff:
John Ernest Brader, Sr.
Defendant:
John S. Wolfe and Allen Gang
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Green v. Wolfe
as 8:2013cv00413
Petitioner:
Terrence Arthur Green
Respondent:
John S. Wolfe
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Davidson v. State of Maryland et al
as 1:2013cv00273
Plaintiff:
Bryant Elliott Davidson
Defendant:
State of Maryland, Division of Corrections, John S. Wolf and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Rustin v. Wolfe et al
as 1:2012cv03359
Petitioner:
Brandon Eugene Rustin
Respondent:
John S. Wolfe and The Attorney General of the State of Maryland
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Smith v. Harris et al
as 1:2012cv02704
Plaintiff:
Donnell Smith
Defendant:
Anthony Harris, Karen Blackwell, Reginald Oliver and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Douglas Jr. v. Wolfe et al
as 1:2012cv02581
Petitioner:
Ellis Richard Douglas Jr.
Respondent:
John S. Wolfe and The Attorney General of the State of Maryland
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Uzzle v. Wolfe et al
as 1:2012cv02557
Petitioner:
D'Quinta Arastoo Uzzle
Respondent:
John S. Wolfe and The Attorney General of the State of Maryland
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Douglas, Jr. v. Goodlander et al
as 1:2012cv01602
Plaintiff:
Ellis Richard Douglas, Jr.
Defendant:
Edwin R. Goodlander and John S. Wolfe
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.
