Cases 1 - 10 of 165
Jaber v. Ray et al
as 5:2024cv00025
Plaintiff:
Faouzi Jaber
Defendant:
Warden Ray, Acting Warden Brown, Officer Titlle and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Federal Question: Bivens Act
Charles Martin v. Jeffrey Nines
as 24-6093
Petitioner:
CHARLES BRANDON MARTIN
Respondent:
JEFFREY NINES, Acting Warden and ATTORNEY GENERAL OF MARYLAND
Charles Martin v. Jeffrey Nines
as 24-6086
Petitioner:
CHARLES BRANDON MARTIN
Respondent:
JEFFREY NINES, Acting Warden and ATTORNEY GENERAL OF MARYLAND
Gama-Perez v. Brown
as 5:2023cv00340
Petitioner:
Josue Gama-Perez
Respondent:
Acting Warden S. Brown
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Federal)
May v. Rokosky et al
as 1:2023cv00217
Petitioner:
Deleon May
Respondent:
Warden Rokosky and Acting Warden LeFever
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federal)
Garcia-Garcia v. Rokosky et al
as 1:2023cv00207
Petitioner:
Juan Garcia-Garcia
Respondent:
Warden Rokosky and Acting Warden LeFever
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federal)
Brandon Roberts v. Wexford Health Sources, Inc.
as 23-6232
Plaintiff / Appellant:
BRANDON ROBERTS
Defendant / Appellee:
WEXFORD HEALTH SOURCES, INC., JOHN/JANE DOE, JEFFREY NINES, Warden at N.B.C.I. and others
Salazar v. Roskosky et al
as 1:2023cv00198
Petitioner:
Anyinson Valoy Salazar
Respondent:
Roskosky and Acting Warden LeFever
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federal)
Lemus v. Rokosky et al
as 1:2023cv00197
Petitioner:
Manuel Camilo Rentria Lemus
Respondent:
Warden Rokosky and Acting Warden LeFever
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federal)
Kenneth Kelley v. William Bohrer
as 23-6179
Petitioner:
KENNETH KELLEY
Respondent:
WILLIAM S. BOHRER, Acting Warden and MARYLAND ATTORNEY GENERAL
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.
