Cases 31 - 40 of 115
Roberts et al v. St. Amand et al
as 1:2018cv02061
Plaintiff:
Daniel Deburgo, Brandon Roberts and Patrick Nerette
Defendant:
John./Jane Doe, Carolyn Atkins, Chief Security Frank Bishop, Jr. and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr
McMahan v. Warden
as 3:2018cv00213
Petitioner:
Ronald McMahan
Respondent:
Warden
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
McMahan v. McMahan
as 5:2018cv06010
Plaintiff:
Charles Daniel McMahan
Defendant:
Julie McMahan
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Wallace v. Ducart et al
as 3:2017cv05488
Plaintiff:
George Ellis Wallace
Defendant:
C. E. Ducart, Davis, McMahan and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Kulhanek v. Griffith et al
as 4:2017cv02431
Plaintiff:
Brandon Kulhanek
Defendant:
Cindy Griffith, Greg Dunn, Ian Wallace and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Turner v. Wilson et al
as 7:2017cv02425
Plaintiff:
Rodney Dean Turner
Defendant:
Alan Wilson , Ashley McMahan , Eugene Donohue and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Jeremy Williams v. Sally Welch, et al
as 17-5776
Plaintiff - Appellant:
JEREMY WILLIAMS
Defendant - Appellee:
SALLY WELCH, MIKE MCMAHAN, KENTUCKY STATE POLICE and others
Brandon Roberts v. Neville, et al
as 17-1557
Plaintiff - Appellant:
BRANDON ROBERTS
Plaintiff:
PATRICK NERETTE and DANIEL DEBURGO
Defendant:
PETER ST. AMAND, Superintendent
Defendant - Appellee:
THOMAS N. NEVILLE, Deputy Director Classification, JASON E. MCMAHAN, Classification Maryland DOC at North Branch Inst., FRANK BISHOP, JR., Warden Maryland DOC at North Branch Institute and others
MARTIN v. QUARTERMAN et al
as 7:2017cv00098
Plaintiff:
KENNETH L MARTIN
Defendant:
QUARTERMAN, SAMPLE, DAVID PAULK and others
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
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.
