U.S. Court of Appeals, Third Circuit Prisoner Petitions Cases
Cases 1 - 10 of 2,858
Abdush Dubose, et al v. Attorney General United States of America, et al
as 24-1815
Plaintiff:
ABDUSH DUBOSE, ZUMAR DUBOSE and KARIEM BASEER DUBOSE
Defendant:
ATTORNEY GENERAL UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, UNITED PARCEL SERVICE INC, UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE and others
Devin Coleman, et al v. William Ngwa, et al
as 24-1877
Plaintiff:
DEVIN L. COLEMAN
Defendant:
WILLIAM NGWA, Provider (at JTVCC), JASVIR KAUR, Provider (at Howard R. Young Correctional Institute "HRYCI"), SHATYRA HENDERSON-HAMWRIGHT, Provider (at HRYCI) and others
Edward Sartoris v. Haidle, et al
as 24-1871
Plaintiff:
EDWARD SARTORIS
Defendant:
WARDEN HAIDLE, SGT. ZITO, Correctional Officer and DEPUTY WARDEN MCCOY
Alvin Washington v. Bregman, et al
as 24-1823
Plaintiff:
ALVIN WASHINGTON
Defendant:
CORRECTIONS OFFICER BREGMAN and SGT. F. MCCLELLAN
Stephen White v. Laurel Harry, et al
as 24-1799
Plaintiff:
STEPHEN WHITE
Defendant:
SUPERINTENDENT LAUREL HARRY, PHILIP JEDRZEJEK, BILL GOODWIN and others
Victor Thomas v. Martynuska, et al
as 24-1824
Plaintiff:
VICTOR DARNELL THOMAS
Defendant:
R.N. MARTYNUSKA, Medical Contractor, FCI Loretto, NORMAN WEIDLICH, Health Care Administrator, FCI Loretto, M.D. KIM SWINDELL and others
Antonio Jones v. NJ Doc Central Transportation, et al
as 24-1758
Plaintiff:
ANTONIO JONES
Defendant:
NJ DOC CENTRAL TRANSPORTATION, DR. IHUOMA NWACHUKWU, M.D., DR. JAMES K. LIU, Rutgers Neurosurgeon and others
Charles Jones v. Jerry Hobeck, et al
as 24-1802
Plaintiff:
CHARLES DARNELL JONES
Defendant:
JERRY HOBECK, Police Officer, JUDITH P. PETRUSH, District Attorney and FRANK PALLONE, JR., Magisterial District Judge
Jomo Barnett v. Joseph Schember, et al
as 24-1801
Plaintiff:
JOMO BARNETT
Defendant:
JOSEPH SCHEMBER, Mayor, DAN SPIZABNEY, Chief of Police, ELIZABETH A. HIRZ, Head of D.A. Office and others
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.
