Cases 1 - 10 of 164
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2024cv00841
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1361 Petition for Writ of Mandamus
Ravenscroft v. Office of the Fredrick County Comissions et al
as 3:2024cv00346
Plaintiff:
Gary Lee Ravenscroft, Jr
Defendant:
Office of the Fredrick County Comissions, Office of the Attorney for the Commonwealth, Office of the Attorney General and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Nealy v. Warden of MCTC et al
as 2:2024cv00291
Petitioner:
Michael Nealy
Respondent:
Warden of MCTC and Maryland Attorney General
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2024cv00780
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1361 Petition for Writ of Mandamus
Palmer v. Norfolk Sheriff et al
as 1:2024cv00746
Plaintiff:
James Dion Palmer
Defendant:
Norfolk Sheriff, Glenn Youngkin and Attorney General
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2024cv00732
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 05 U.S.C. § 702 Administrative Procedure Act
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2024cv00591
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1361 Petition for Writ of Mandamus
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2024cv00463
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1361 Petition for Writ of Mandamus
Mitchell v. The Attorney Generals
as 1:2024cv00232
Plaintiff:
Karl C. Mitchell
Defendant:
The Attorney Generals
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2024cv00186
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1361 Petition for Writ of Mandamus
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.
