Cases 1 - 10 of 4,084
Nance v. United States Of America
as 7:2024cv00323
Plaintiff:
Peter Michael Nance
Defendant:
United States Of America
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2674 Federal Tort Claims Act
Rufus v. Vasquez et al
as 1:2024cv00825
Plaintiff:
Michael Rufus
Defendant:
Vasquez, Thompson, McWilliams and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Atkins v. Unknown
as 1:2024cv00822
Plaintiff:
Michael Atkins
Defendant:
Unknown
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Mitchell v. Mayflower Transit, LLC
as 2:2024cv00308
Plaintiff:
Michael D. Mitchell
Defendant:
Mayflower Transit, LLC
Cause Of Action: 49 U.S.C. § 11706 Carmack Amendent
Nealy v. Warden of MCTC et al
as 2:2024cv00291
Petitioner:
Michael Nealy
Respondent:
Warden of MCTC and Maryland Attorney General
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Marciano v. Dotson
as 2:2024cv00304
Petitioner:
Michael Marciano
Respondent:
Chadwick Dotson
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Board of Trustees, Sheet Metal Workers' National Pension Fund v. Tardif Sheet Metal & Air Conditioning, Inc. et al
as 1:2024cv00790
Plaintiff:
Board of Trustees, Sheet Metal Workers' National Pension Fund
Defendant:
Tardif Sheet Metal & Air Conditioning, Inc., Michael Tardif and Mercedes Tardif
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 1132 E.R.I.S.A.-Employee Benefits
Drayton v. Unknown
as 1:2024cv00795
Petitioner:
Michael Drayton
Respondent:
Unknown
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Keeton v. Dudley et al
as 3:2024cv00321
Plaintiff:
Brooke Keeton
Defendant:
James Roane Dudley, Angela Epps, Brendan Farmer and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Holmes v. Tocco et al
as 2:2024cv00286
Plaintiff:
Ebony Holmes
Defendant:
Vincent Tocco, Larry Chip Filer, Larry D. Boone and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
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.
