Cases 1 - 10 of 348
Darling v. Webber et al
as 1:2024cv01183
Petitioner:
Deshaune D. Darling
Respondent:
Webber and Maryland Attorney General
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
(PC) Webber v. Barrios et al
as 1:2024cv00461
Plaintiff:
Doyal Webber
Defendant:
J. Barrios, J. Ervin, P. Liamas and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Soliven #342149 v. Hoffman et al
as 2:2024cv00740
Plaintiff:
Garett Rosendo Soliven
Defendant:
Renae Hoffman, Nathan Graham, Patrick Karaloff and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Walter Moffett v. Michael Dittman, et al
as 24-1023
Plaintiff:
WALTER J.D. MOFFETT
Defendant:
MICHAEL A. DITTMAN, SECURITY DIRECTOR WEBBER, MICHAEL BUETTNER and others
Deshaune Darling v. Webber
as 23-7221
Petitioner / Appellant:
DESHAUNE D. DARLING
Respondent / Appellee:
WEBBER, Warden
Brooks v. Tenney et al
as 4:2023cv05163
Plaintiff:
Carl Alonzo Brooks
Defendant:
Nancy Tenney, Corey Endo, K. Gallagher and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Taft et al v. Reynolds et al
as 5:2023cv04059
Plaintiff:
David Lynn Taft, Jr, Arthur James Triplett, Jr, Jason Lee Cook and others
Defendant:
Kim Reynolds, Terry Branstad, Kelly Garcia and others
Interested Party:
Robert Thole
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Jeremy Defour v. Lieutenant Webber
as 23-7010
Plaintiff / Appellant:
JEREMY PAUL DEFOUR
Defendant / Appellee:
LIEUTENANT WEBBER, OFFICER BEATY, a/k/a Officer Bates, INTELLIGENCE OFFICER ROSSON and others
Malone v. Williams et al
as 3:2023cv50348
Plaintiff:
William Malone and Bill
Defendant:
Jane Doe, John Doe, Tarry Williams and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Webber v. Grove
as 8:2023cv04624
Plaintiff:
Robert A Webber
Defendant:
Roderick Grove
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights, State Filers
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.
