Cases 21 - 30 of 44
John Fishback v. Bobby Shearin
as 12-6186
Plaintiff - Appellant:
JOHN W. FISHBACK
Defendant - Appellee:
BOBBY SHEARIN, Warden, RICHARD J. GRAHAM, JR., Asst. Warden, GARY D. MAYNARD, Secretary of Public Safety and Correctional Services and others
Defendant:
JOHN A. ROWLEY
David Greene v. Warden Shearin
as 12-6030
Plaintiff - Appellant:
DAVID BUFORD GREENE
Defendant - Appellee:
BOBBY SHEARIN, Warden and BRUCE LILLER, Chief Psychologist
James Lomax v. Bobby Shearin
as 11-7370
Plaintiff - Appellant:
JAMES MESHACH LOMAX
Defendant - Appellee:
BOBBY SHEARIN, Warden and THE REDUCTION IN VIOLENCE COMMITTEE
Arthur Rodgers v. Bobby Shearin
as 11-7359
Plaintiff - Appellant:
ARTHUR RODGERS
Defendant - Appellee:
BOBBY SHEARIN, Warden
William Alton v. Maryland Dept of Public Safety
as 11-7272
Plaintiff - Appellant:
WILLIAM E. ALTON, III
Defendant - Appellee:
MARYLAND DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY AND CORRECTIONAL SERVICES, et al, KATHLEEN GREEN, Warden Eastern Corr. Inst., BOBBY SHEARIN, Warden Western Corr. Inst. and others
Arthur Rodgers v. Bobby Shearidin
as 11-7138
Plaintiff - Appellant:
ARTHUR RODGERS
Defendant - Appellee:
BOBBY SHEARIN, Warden
Keith Oakley v. J. Stouffer
as 11-6894
Plaintiff - Appellant:
KEITH OAKLEY
Defendant - Appellee:
J. MICHAEL STOUFFER and BOBBY SHEARIN, Warden
Nicholas Jones v. J. Stouffer
as 10-7573
Plaintiff - Appellant:
NICHOLAS WARNER JONES, a/k/a Charles Jones
Defendant - Appellee:
J. MICHAEL STOUFFER, Commissioner, BOBBY SHEARIN, Warden and MARYLAND DIVISION OF CORRECTIONS
Thomas Alston v. John Doe
as 10-7567
Plaintiff - Appellant:
THOMAS F. ALSTON
Defendant - Appellee:
JOHN DOE, BOBBY SHEARIN, Warden, K. HILL-PEAY, Doc. Hq. Arp/IGP Coordinator and others
Thomas Davis v. Attorney General of Maryland
as 10-6997
Petitioner - Appellant:
THOMAS DAVIS, a/k/a Thomas Edwards
Respondent - Appellee:
ATTORNEY GENERAL OF MARYLAND and BOBBY SHEARIN, Warden
Respondent:
JOHN ROWLEY
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.