Cases 1 - 8 of 8
El-Bey v. Office of the States Attorney for Baltimore City et al
as 1:2024cv00645
Plaintiff:
Bro Stephen Michael El-Bey
Defendant:
Office of the States Attorney for Baltimore City, Baltimore City Office of the Clerk, Metropolitan Transition Center and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr Prisoner Civil Rights
Catherine Randolph v. Baltimore City States Attorney
as 14-2108
Plaintiff - Appellant:
CATHERINE DENISE RANDOLPH
Defendant - Appellee:
STATES ATTORNEY FOR BALTIMORE CITY
Kennedy Bost v. Detective Patricia Bradd
as 13-2297
Plaintiff - Appellant:
KENNEDY BOST
Defendant - Appellee:
DETECTIVE PATRICIA BRADDS
Defendant:
OFFICE OF THE STATE'S ATTORNEY FOR BALTIMORE CITY, GREGG L. BERNSTEIN, Esq., SARA ELAINE GROSS, Esq., Assistant State's Attorney and others
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2012cv01380
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000
Gross v. Office of the State's Attorney for Baltimore City et al
as 1:2011cv02699
Plaintiff:
Andrew Gross
Defendant:
Office of the State's Attorney for Baltimore City and Mayor and City Council Of Baltimore
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 451
Marshall v. States Attorney for Baltimore City et al
as 1:2009cv01388
Petitioner:
Gregory Marshall
Respondent:
States Attorney for Baltimore City, J. Philip Morgan, J. Michael Stouffer and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
FRANKLIN v. SOBINA et al
as 2:2007cv01194
Petitioner:
ERNEST FRANKLIN
Respondent:
RAYMOND SOBINA and STATE ATTORNEY OF BALTIMORE CITY MARYLAND
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federal)
FRANKLIN v. SOBINA
as 1:2007cv00023
Petitioner:
ERNEST FRANKLIN
Respondent:
RAYMOND SOBINA and STATE ATTORNEY OF BALTIMORE CITY MARYLAND
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Federal)
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.
