Cases 1 - 10 of 36
Randolph v. Clayton et al
as 1:2023cv00883
Plaintiff:
Juan Alex Randolph, Jr.
Defendant:
Lt. Clayton, Officer COII J. Milliner and Officer West
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr Prisoner Civil Rights
McDowell v. State of Maryland et al
as 1:2022cv01382
Petitioner:
Randolph McDowell
Respondent:
State of Maryland, Baltimore City Circuit Court and The Attorney General of the State of Maryland
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Randolph v. WCI
as 1:2022cv01105
Plaintiff:
Juan Randolph
Defendant:
WCI
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr Prisoner Civil Rights
Aurel v. State of Maryland et al
as 1:2022cv00409
Plaintiff:
Mitch Aurel and Mich Aurel
Defendant:
State of Maryland, Larry Hogan, Wayne Hill and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr Prisoner Civil Rights
Randolph v. Jessup Correctional Institution et al
as 8:2020cv03422
Defendant:
Jessup Correctional Institution, Dr. Moore, Officer Modozie and others
Plaintiff:
Juan Alex Randolph, Jr
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr
Harris v. Quay et al
as 8:2020cv02894
Respondent:
The Attorney General of the State of Maryland and WARDEN QUAY
Petitioner:
RANDOLPH S. HARRIS
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Randolph v. Walley et al
as 8:2020cv00272
Defendant:
Officer Parcell, Officers Powers, Lt Walley and others
Plaintiff:
Juan Alex Randolph, Jr
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr
Waters v. Randolph et al
as 1:2018cv00986
Plaintiff:
Benjamin Henry Waters
Defendant:
Dionne Randolph, Sherry Greene and Tracey Varda
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Waters v. Randolph et al
as 1:2017cv02960
Plaintiff:
Benjamin Waters
Defendant:
Dionne Randolph, J. Francis, Sherry Greene and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Randolph v. Potter et al
as 8:2016cv02739
Plaintiff:
Juan Alex Randolph, Jr
Defendant:
Potter, Parsley, Igwe and others
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.
