Cases 11 - 20 of 456
Abdullah v. Briggs et al
as 4:2024cv00223
Plaintiff:
Taji Abdullah
Defendant:
Gregory Briggs, Bruce Levally, LaTonya Ray and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
RAY v. PHILADELPHIA PRISON SOCIETY et al
as 2:2023cv04683
Plaintiff:
DIANA A. RAY
Defendant:
PHILADELPHIA PRISON SOCIETY and P.I.C.C.
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
DANIELS et al v. MARLEIHIA HARPER et al
as 2:2023cv03867
Plaintiff:
DANEE SLAYTON, KELVIN DANIELS, UMIR IDRIS and others
Defendant:
MARLEIHIA HARPER, DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICE, NICOLE MACK and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Peachy v. Bureau of Prisons et al
as 1:2023cv01506
Petitioner:
Nathan Joel Peachy
Respondent:
Bureau of Prisons and Heather Ray
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
Horst v. Litz et al
as 1:2023cv00917
Plaintiff:
Dwight William Horst
Defendant:
Tina Litz, Michael Ott, Rebecca Davis and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
RAY v. CAMACHO et al
as 3:2023cv00066
Plaintiff:
MELISSA M. RAY
Defendant:
MS. CAMACHO, CHRISTIAN SMITH and PRIME CARE MEDICAL, INC.
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr Prisoner Civil Rights
DOE TEST v. WARDEN SCI PHOENIX
as 2:2023cv99994
Plaintiff:
RAY DOE TEST
Defendant:
WARDEN SCI PHOENIX
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Ernest Wholaver, Jr. v. Jaime Sorber
as 22-3190
Plaintiff / Appellant:
ERNEST RAY WHOLAVER, JR.
Defendant / Appellee:
MR. JAIME SORBER, Superintendent
MCDONALD v. RANSOM et al
as 2:2022cv00990
Petitioner:
SHAWN RAY MCDONALD
Respondent:
SUPERINTENDENT KEVIN J. RANSOM, DISTRICT ATTORNEY OF BEAVER COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA and ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
USA v. Fareed Ray
as 22-2199
Plaintiff / Appellee:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Defendant / Appellant:
FAREED RAY
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.
