Cases 91 - 100 of 155
Crotty v. Massachusetts Parole Board et al
as 4:2010cv40245
Plaintiff:
Richard Crotty
Defendant:
Massachusetts Parole Board, Mark A. Conrad, Candace Kochin and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Schmitt v. Seward, et al
as 10-2356
Plaintiff - Appellant:
JOSEPH P. SCHMITT
Defendant - Appellee:
CARLIN SEWARD, ROBERT MURPHY, Superintendent, BERNARD BRADY and others
Feijoo v. Massachusetts Department of Corrections et al
as 1:2010cv11951
Plaintiff:
Humberto Feijoo
Defendant:
Massachusetts Department of Corrections, Khalid N. Khan, Robert Murphy and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Mederos v. Murphy, et al
as 10-2222
Petitioner - Appellant:
ANTONIO MEDEROS
Respondent - Appellee:
ROBERT MURPHY, Superintendent of Bridgewater State Hospital, HAROLD W. CLARKE, Commissioner and COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS
Cheney v. Barry
as 1:2010cv00449
Defendant:
Charles Anzaldi, Robert C. Barry, Susan Murphy and others
Plaintiff:
Michael G. Cheney
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Battista v. Clarke, et al
as 10-1965
Plaintiff - Appellee:
SANDY J. BATTISTA
Defendant - Appellant:
HAROLD W. CLARKE and MICHAEL CORSINI
Defendant:
KATHLEEN M. DENNEHY, ROBERT MURPHY, STEVE FAIRLY and others
Interested Party:
MHM SERVICES, INC.
Aldrich v. Town of Brookline, et al
as 10-1490
Plaintiff - Appellant:
ROBERT F. ALDRICH
Defendant - Appellee:
BROOKLINE, MA, BENNY SZETO, Brookline Police Officer, SEAN WILLIAMS, Brookline Police Officer and others
Murphy v. Dickhaut
as 1:2010cv10491
Petitioner:
Kashmoni Murphy
Respondent:
Thomas Dickhaut
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Murphy v. Maine, State of
as 1:2010cv10246
Plaintiff:
Carol Ann Murphy
Defendant:
Maine, State of
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Murphy v. Maine, State of
as 1:2010cv10245
Plaintiff:
Carol Ann Murphy
Defendant:
Maine, State of
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441 Notice of Removal
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.
