Cases 21 - 30 of 200
Dean Viprino v. Warden Lewisburg USP
as 22-3197
Plaintiff / Appellant:
DEAN VIPRINO
Defendant / Appellee:
WARDEN LEWISBURG USP
YOUNG v. NORTHAMPTON COUNTY et al
as 5:2022cv04059
Plaintiff:
CANDIDO YOUNG
Defendant:
NORTHAMPTON COUNTY, COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA, DISTRICT ATTORNEY'S OFFICE OF NORTHAMPTON COUNTY and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
PERMENTER v. ARMEL et al
as 2:2022cv02892
Petitioner:
RYSHEEN PERMENTER
Respondent:
ERIC T. ARMEL, DEBORAH I. CARPENTER, JOHN J. TALABER and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federal)
TOOTHMAN v. PRIMECARE MEDICAL, INC. et al
as 2:2022cv02152
Plaintiff:
DEAN E. TOOTHMAN, E. and DEAN E. TOOTHMAN, JR.
Defendant:
PRIMECARE MEDICAL, INC. and DR. GESSNER
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Jeffery Dean v. Eric Tice, et al
as 22-1914
Plaintiff / Appellant:
JEFFERY DEAN
Defendant / Appellee:
ERIC TICE, Superintendent SCI Somerset
TOOTHMAN
as 2:2022cv01839
Petitioner:
DEAN E. TOOTHMAN, JR
Defendant:
BUCKS COUNTY PUBLIC DEFENDERS OFFICE, MARTIN SNAYDER and SCOTT HALL
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Wenhold v. Marsh et al
as 4:2022cv00105
Plaintiff:
Jordan Dean Wenhold
Defendant:
Dr. Robert Marsh, Manager Nelson, Lt. J. Stable and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
SECHLER v. THOMAS et al
as 3:2022cv00003
Plaintiff:
ERIC KEVIN SECHLER
Defendant:
DAVID THOMAS and DEAN DURST
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr Prisoner Civil Rights
DEANS v. FLOYD
as 1:2021cv00362
Plaintiff:
DARRIAN DEANS
Defendant:
AUGUSTUS FLOYD
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr Prisoner Civil Rights
Wallace Mitchell v. Harley Lappin, et al
as 21-3355
Plaintiff / Appellant:
WALLACE MITCHELL
Defendant:
HARLEY LAPPIN, Director-Bureau of Prisons, THOMAS R. KANE, Director Federal Bureau of Prisons, HARRELL WATTS, Administrator/Bureau of Prisons and others
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.
