Cases 21 - 30 of 31
Bell et al v. Clinton County Correctional Facility et al
as 3:2016cv00155
Plaintiff:
Jeffery Bell and Anton McCullough
Defendant:
Clinton County Correctional Facility, Oasis and Securustech
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
HARRIS v. MEEKS
as 1:2015cv00001
Petitioner:
ANTON HARRIS
Respondent:
BOBBY MEEKS, UNITED STATES ATTORNEY and UNITED STATES ATTORNEY GENERAL
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241
JOHNSON v. COUNTY et al
as 2:2013cv01449
Petitioner:
ANTONE JOHNSON
Respondent:
MONROE COUNTY, RONALD E. VICAN and JENNIFER HARLACHER SIBUM
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Williams v. Ebbert
as 1:2010cv02464
Petitioner:
Anton M. Williams
Respondent:
David J. Ebbert
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241
Bohn v. James T. Vaughn Correctional Center (DCC) et al
as 1:2009cv00420
Plaintiff:
Anton Bohn
Defendant:
James T. Vaughn Correctional Center (DCC), James T. Vaughn DCC Medical Staff, R. Bailey and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Maurice Emile v. Anton Skerl
as 08-4414
Plaintiff - Appellant:
MAURICE EMILE
Defendant - Appellee:
ANTON SKERL
TORNOWSKE v. COMMONWEALTH OF PA et al
as 2:2008cv00502
Petitioner:
ANTON TORNOWSKE
Respondent:
COMMONWEALTH OF PA, THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA and THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY OF THE COUNTY OF WESTMORELAND
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
GREEN v. GONZALEZ et al
as 1:2007cv05235
Petitioner:
MICHAEL ANTON GREEN
Respondent:
ALBERTO GONZALEZ, MICHAEL CHERTOFF, SCOTT WEBER and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
EMILE v. SKERL
as 3:2007cv00248
Plaintiff:
MAURICE EMILE
Defendant:
ANTON SKERL
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr Prisoner Civil Rights
RIGNEY v. HAYMAN et al
as 1:2007cv03444
Petitioner:
ANTON RIGNEY
Respondent:
GEORGE HAYMAN and STUART RABNER
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
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.
