Cases 1 - 10 of 25
Ndokey Enow v. Talmadge Reeves
as 19-7816
Defendant / Appellee:
TALMADGE REEVES, MD, sued individually and officially
Defendant:
OFC. A. HALL, sued individually and officially, RICKY FOXWELL, Warden, LIEUTENANT MICHAEL DAUGHERTY and others
Plaintiff / Appellant:
NDOKEY ENOW
Enow v. Wexford Health Sources Inc.
as 8:2019cv02547
Plaintiff:
Ndokey Enow
Defendant:
Wexford Health Sources Inc.
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr
Ndokey Enow v. Ricky Foxwell
as 19-6351
Defendant / Appellee:
PAUL KNIGHT, CMS II, STEPHEN ELLIOTT, Lieutenant, MIKE MUIR, Case Management Supervisor and others
Plaintiff / Appellant:
NDOKEY ENOW
Enow v. Foxwell et al
as 8:2017cv02312
Plaintiff:
Ndokey Enow
Defendant:
Ricky Foxwell, Walter West, Stephen Elliott and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Ndokey Enow v. Richard Dovey
as 17-6819
Plaintiff - Appellant:
NDOKEY ENOW
Defendant - Appellee:
RICHARD DOVEY, Warden, IAN BRYANT, CHARLES BUTTS and others
Ndokey Enow v. Robert Green
as 17-6517
Plaintiff - Appellant:
NDOKEY ENOW
Defendant - Appellee:
ROBERT L. GREEN, SHELFORD GILLIAM, ANTHONY MUDALUE and others
Defendant:
WARDEN
Enow v. Fowell, Warden et al
as 8:2017cv00850
Plaintiff:
Ndokey Enow
Defendant:
Ricky Fowell, Warden , Talmadge Reeves, MD., Michael Daugherty and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Enow v. Armstrong & Cheris, Chartered et al
as 8:2017cv00841
Plaintiff:
Ndokey Enow
Defendant:
Armstrong & Cheris, Chartered, Philip H. Armstrong, Esq and Howard R. Cheris, Esq.
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Enow v. Wolfe et al
as 8:2017cv00341
Plaintiff:
Ndokey Enow
Defendant:
John Wolfe, Walter West, William Clayton and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Enow v. Wolfe, Warden et al
as 8:2017cv00050
Petitioner:
Ndokey Enow
Respondent:
John Wolfe, Warden and The Attorney General Of The State Of Maryland
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
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.
