Cases 41 - 50 of 1,389
QUICK v. BOGAN
as 2:2023cv01636
Plaintiff:
EDDIE LEE QUICK
Defendant:
MR. BOGAN
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
QUICK v. MR. RACHUBA
as 2:2023cv01637
Plaintiff:
EDDIE LEE QUICK
Defendant:
MR. RACHUBA
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
SPANN v. SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA et al
as 2:2023cv01566
Plaintiff:
ANTOINE SPANN
Defendant:
SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA, MICHAEL D. OVERMYER, TIMOTHY HOLMER and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
QUICK v. SALAMA
as 2:2023cv01538
Plaintiff:
EDDIE LEE QUICK
Defendant:
MR. B. SALAMA
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Collymore v. Estock et al
as 1:2023cv00596
Plaintiff:
Derrell Collymore
Defendant:
Lee Estock, C.O. George, C.O. John Doe and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
KOUGH v. TRAMARKI et al
as 3:2023cv00062
Plaintiff:
RUSSELL LEE KOUGH, JR.
Defendant:
TRAMARKI, NAGLE and PRIME CARE MEDICAL
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr Prisoner Civil Rights
TETTERTON v. WARDEN, FCI FORT DIX
as 1:2023cv01394
Petitioner:
TERRY LEE TETTERTON
Respondent:
WARDEN, FCI FORT DIX
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
WILSON SR. v. MATELIS et al
as 2:2023cv00909
Plaintiff:
JIMMY LEE WILSON, SR.
Defendant:
BUCKS COUNTY CORRECTIONAL FACILITY, WARDEN MATELIS, MS. REED and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
WILSON SR. v. BUCKS COUNTY CORRECTIONAL FACILITY et al
as 2:2023cv00912
Plaintiff:
JIMMY LEE WILSON, SR.
Defendant:
BUCKS COUNTY CORRECTIONAL FACILITY, WARDEN MATELIS, MS. REED and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
CARDWELL v. ESTOCK et al
as 2:2023cv00354
Plaintiff:
JAMAR CARDWELL
Defendant:
SUPERINTENDENT LEE ESTOCK, SUPERINTENDENT MELINDA ADAMS, MR SHEEDER and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr 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.
