Cases 41 - 50 of 56
Dana West v. Susan Murphy
as 13-2014
Plaintiff - Appellant:
DANA T. WEST, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, ANTHONY HAIG, GARY SAUNDERS and others
Plaintiff:
ERIC JONES, KEVIN ADAMS, TONIA BOWIE and others
Defendant - Appellee:
SUSAN MURPHY, former Warden, Baltimore Central Booking and Intake Center, individually and in her official capacity and WILLIAM JEDNORSKI, former Warden, Baltimore Central Booking and Intake Center, individually and in his official capacity
Defendant:
CITY OF BALTIMORE, BALTIMORE CITY POLICE DEPARTMENT and MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF BALTIMORE
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 13-16493
Plaintiff - Appellant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant - Appellee:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2013cv01598
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights (Employment Discrimination)
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 5:2012cv01577
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Adams v. C. et al
as 1:2012cv01916
Petitioner:
Kevin Adams
Respondent:
Johnson C. and The Attorney General of the State of Maryland
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Gandy v. City of Bay Minette, Alabama
as 1:2012cv00315
Plaintiff:
Kevin Adam Gandy
Defendant:
City of Bay Minette, Alabama
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 201
Adams v. The City of New York et al
as 1:2012cv00172
Plaintiff:
Kevin Adams
Defendant:
Police Officers John Does 1-5 and The City of New York
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Adams v. Wolfe et al
as 1:2011cv02598
Plaintiff:
Kevin Adams
Defendant:
John Wolfe and Attorney General for the State of Maryland
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 8:2011cv00707
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 7:2010cv04942
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000
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.
