Cases 11 - 20 of 34,781
ZERUTH v. WARDEN OF SCI FOREST
as 1:2024cv00145
Petitioner:
JUSTIN ZERUTH
Respondent:
WARDEN OF SCI FOREST
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Rodney Derrickson v. Superintendent Forest SCI, et al
as 24-2047
Plaintiff:
RODNEY DERRICKSON
Defendant:
SUPERINTENDENT FOREST SCI, ATTORNEY GENERAL PENNSYLVANIA and DISTRICT ATTORNEY DELAWARE COUNTY
Greg DeYoung v. Superintendent Forest SCI, et al
as 24-2049
Plaintiff:
GREG DEYOUNG
Defendant:
SUPERINTENDENT FOREST SCI and DISTRICT ATTORNEY BUCKS COUNTY
Brown v. Ricard
as 3:2024cv00921
Petitioner:
Mark Brown
Respondent:
Warden Ricard
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
Gill v. United States of America
as 1:2024cv00922
Petitioner:
Joseph Gill
Respondent:
United States of America
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
Brooks v. United States of America
as 1:2024cv00914
Petitioner:
Michael Brooks
Respondent:
United States of America
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
Rodriquez v. LSCI-Allenwood
as 3:2024cv00920
Petitioner:
Thomas Phillip Rodriquez
Respondent:
Warden of LSCI-Allenwood
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
BAUR v. MCGINLEY et al
as 2:2024cv02421
Petitioner:
BRIAN D. BAUR
Respondent:
TOM MCGINLEY, LAWRENCE S. KRASNER and MICHELLE A. HENRY
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
BOWERS v. CLARK et al
as 2:2024cv00803
Petitioner:
BRANDON BOWERS
Respondent:
Superintendent Gina Clark and PETER C. ACKER
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
NAPPER v. UNDERWOOD
as 3:2024cv00122
Petitioner:
TYWAN NAPPER
Respondent:
WARDEN MICHAEL UNDERWOOD
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.
