Cases 1 - 10 of 142
Dunbar v. Bailey et al
as 1:2025cv01754
Petitioner:
James Dunbar
Respondent:
William Bailey
Defendant:
Maryland Attorney General
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Dixon v. Bloomberg et al
as 1:2025cv01689
Plaintiff:
Devont'e Dixon
Defendant:
Robert Bloomberg, J. Lewis Co, Jhon Milligan and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr Prisoner Civil Rights
Dixon v. Corizon et al
as 1:2025cv01600
Plaintiff:
Joseph Michael Dixon, III
Defendant:
Corizon, Centurion, Keefe Commissary Network and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr Prisoner Civil Rights
Chaney v. Bailey et al
as 1:2025cv01541
Petitioner:
Diamond Cleon Chaney
Respondent:
William Bailey
Defendant:
Maryland Attorney General
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Chang v. Bailey et al
as 1:2025cv01330
Plaintiff:
Richard E. Chang, Jr.
Defendant:
Warden William Bailey, Capt Foxwell, Lt. Gattis and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr Prisoner Civil Rights
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 5:2025cv00507
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question: Employment Discrimination
Owens v. Bailey et al
as 1:2025cv00772
Plaintiff:
Dejuan L Owens
Defendant:
William Bailey, Officer Mercdin, Yes Care Medical Staff East/West and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr Prisoner Civil Rights
Turner v. Bailey et al
as 1:2025cv00722
Petitioner:
Deon Turner
Respondent:
William Bailey and Maryland Attorney General
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Dennis v. Eastern Correctional Institution et al
as 1:2025cv00668
Plaintiff:
Tevin Dennis
Defendant:
Eastern Correctional Institution, Warden William Bailey, Captain Smith and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr Prisoner Civil Rights
Deon Turner v. William Bailey
as 25-7025
Plaintiff:
Deon Turner
Defendant:
William Bailey, Maryland Attorney General
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.
