Cases 111 - 120 of 85,561
Huff v. Booher et al
as 3:2024cv01000
Plaintiff:
Clark K. Huff
Defendant:
Bradley Booher, Tiffany Sottile, Dr. Jacqueline Howard and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Kerry Ransome v. Superintendent Phoenix SCI, et al
as 24-2110
Plaintiff:
KERRY RANSOME
Defendant:
SUPERINTENDENT PHOENIX SCI, DISTRICT ATTORNEY PHILADELPHIA and ATTORNEY GENERAL PENNSYLVANIA
TROTMAN v. BLAGOYAVICH
as 1:2024cv07018
Plaintiff:
ENERVA W. TROTMAN
Defendant:
LIEUTENANT BLAGOYAVICH
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
HUGHES v. PHILADELPHIA COUNTY DISTRICT ATTORNEYS OFFICE et al
as 2:2024cv02613
Plaintiff:
TAHVON HUGHES
Defendant:
PHILADELPHIA COUNTY DISTRICT ATTORNEYS OFFICE and DEFENDER ASSOCIATION OF PHILADELPHIA
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Philmore v. Booher
as 1:2024cv00712
Petitioner:
La'Ron D. Philmore
Respondent:
Bradley M. Booher and Kathleen Jennings
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Federal)
Hopper v. Superior Court of the State of Delaware et al
as 1:2024cv00528
Plaintiff:
Chad Eric Hopper
Defendant:
Superior Court of the State of Delaware and Andrea Johnson
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
CABRERA-ARTEAGA v. WARDEN THOMPSON, FCI FORT DIX
as 1:2024cv05441
Petitioner:
SANTOS EDELMIR CABRERA ARTEAGA and SANTOS EDELMIR CABRERA-ARTEAGA
Respondent:
WARDEN THOMPSON, FCI FORT DIX
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
BLACKWELL v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
as 2:2024cv00872
Petitioner:
NORMAN BLACKWELL
Respondent:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255 Motion to Vacate Sentence
URBANO v. ACJ et al
as 2:2024cv00874
Petitioner:
MICHAEL J. URBANO
Respondent:
ACJ and ACTING WARDEN SHANE DADY
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.
