US District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania Prisoner Petitions Cases

Cases filed
Cases 1 - 10 of 10,306
JOHNSON v. BRADLEY
as 3:2021cv00182
Petitioner: MELVIN JOHNSON
Respondent: WARDEN BRADLEY
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241
WALLACE v. COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA et al
as 2:2021cv01348
Petitioner: VINCENT THOMAS WALLACE
Respondent: COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA, PENNSYLVANIA ATTORNEY GENERAL'S OFFICE and WARDEN OF SCI-ROCKVIEW
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
LODUCA v. GOOGLE CORPORATION
as 2:2021cv01346
Plaintiff: JOSEPH LODUCA
Defendant: GOOGLE CORPORATION
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr
JOHNSON v. THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY OF THE COUNTY OF ERIE et al
as 1:2021cv00278
Petitioner: BRYANT K. JOHNSON
Respondent: THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY OF THE COUNTY OF ERIE, THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA and MS. OLVIER
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
MORGAN v. COUNTY OF FAYETTE et al
as 2:2021cv01340
Plaintiff: ADAM E. MORGAN
Defendant: COUNTY OF FAYETTE, JOHN LANKEY, ANGELA KERN and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr
MORRIS v. ZAKEN et al
as 2:2021cv01338
Plaintiff: DEREYK L MORRIS
Defendant: SUPERINTENDENT MICHAEL ZAKEN, DEPUTY STEPHEN BUZAS, CAPTAIN KENNEDY and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr
HAWKEY v. CHEW et al
as 2:2021cv01339
Plaintiff: HUGH JAMES HAWKEY, JR.
Defendant: DOUGLAS CHEW, GINA CERILLI, SEAN KERTES and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr
NEWMONES v. RANSOM et al
as 1:2021cv00276
Plaintiff: STEPHON ORLANDO NEWMONES
Defendant: MS. RANSOM, C.O. SNIPPITT and Mr. GOTTUSMAN
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr
DAWSON v. MR. LATTENER et al
as 3:2021cv00177
Plaintiff: ARTEMUS DAWSON
Defendant: MR. LATTENER, MS. PEASE, DR. NIEGI M.D. and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr
MACLLOYD v. TRATE
as 2:2021cv01326
Petitioner: DAVID ERIKE MACLLOYD
Respondent: BRADLEY TRATE
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241

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.


Why Is My Information Online?