Cases 11 - 20 of 21
Phelps v. Grondolsky et al
as 1:2011cv11032
Plaintiff:
Coy Phelps
Defendant:
Jeffrey Grondolsky, Walter Johnson and Ivonne Benet-Rivera
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1981
Shedlock v. Massachusetts Department of Correction et al
as 1:2010cv11249
Plaintiff:
Paul F. Shedlock
Defendant:
Massachusetts Department of Correction, Harold W. Clarke, Michael Corsini and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Mains v. Ambrose et al
as 1:2010cv10806
Plaintiff:
Walter Mains
Defendant:
Jean Ambrose and Commonwealth of Massaschusetts
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Magri v. Pittsfield Police Department et al
as 3:2010cv30083
Plaintiff:
Anthony Magri
Defendant:
Pittsfield Police Department, Walter Powell, Thomas Bowler and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Walters v Peter St. Amand
as 1:2010cv10196
Petitioner:
Brian Walters
Respondent:
Peter St. Amand
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Schmitt et al v. Botelho et al
as 1:2009cv10978
Plaintiff:
Joseph P. Schmitt
Defendant:
Manuel Botelho, Natalya Pushkina, Petrou and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Schmitt v. Seward et al
as 1:2009cv10816
Plaintiff:
Joseph P. Schmitt
Defendant:
Carlin Seward, Robert Murphy, Bernard Brady and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Hatt et al v. Clarke et al
as 1:2009cv10150
Plaintiff:
Bruce Hatt, Bryant Glover, Sean Milliken and others
Defendant:
Harold W. Clarke, Veronica M. Madden, Robert Murphy and others
Cause Of Action: Federal Question
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2008cv11541
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: Federal Question
Schmitt v. Murphy et al
as 1:2008cv40110
Plaintiff:
Joseph P. Schmitt
Defendant:
Robert F. Murphy, Kilroy, William McKay and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
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.
