Cases 1 - 10 of 31
Horton v. State of Maryland et al
as 1:2024cv01231
Respondent:
Jeffrey Nines, State of Maryland and Ricky Horton
Petitioner:
Troydrick Horton
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federal)
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
Gulliver v. Nines et al
as 1:2023cv01578
Plaintiff:
Brandon Gulliver
Defendant:
Jeffrey Nines and Ronald Stotler
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr Prisoner Civil Rights
Bogues v. Nines et al
as 1:2023cv01334
Plaintiff:
Ericky Bogues
Defendant:
Warden Jeffrey Nines, K. Lamp and Food Manager Service
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr Prisoner Civil Rights
Nolan Floyd, Sr. v. Jeffrey Nines
as 23-6317
Plaintiff / Appellant:
NOLAN KINARD FLOYD, SR.
Defendant / Appellee:
WARDEN JEFFREY NINES, RONALD STOTLER, Chief of Security and MS. SHARON
Basnueva v. Nines et al
as 1:2023cv00833
Plaintiff:
Yera Basnueva
Defendant:
Warden Jeffrey Nines, Sgt. Mallowe, Sgt. Smith and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr Prisoner Civil Rights
Donaldson v. Nines et al
as 1:2023cv00753
Plaintiff:
Michael Donaldson
Defendant:
Warden Jeffrey Nines and Chief of Security Ronald Stottler
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr Prisoner Civil Rights
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
Floyd v. Nines et al.
as 1:2023cv00677
Plaintiff:
Nolan Kinard Floyd, Sr.
Defendant:
Jeffrey Ninet "et al.", Jeffrey Nines and Ronald Stotler, .
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr Prisoner Civil Rights
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.
