Cases 21 - 30 of 98
EDMONDS v. RHOADES
as 2:2016cv01193
Plaintiff:
MELISSA EDMONDS
Defendant:
DANIELLE RHOADES
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr Prisoner Civil Rights
MITCHELL v. OBRIEN et al
as 2:2016cv03556
Plaintiff:
ERIC SCOTT MITCHELL
Defendant:
EDMOND OBRIEN, DENNIS LEIGHTON, KEITH M. BERTRAM and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
EDMONDS v. USA
as 2:2016cv00903
Respondent:
USA
Petitioner:
JERMAINE EDMONDS
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255
EDMONDS v. ALLEGHENY HEALTH DEPARTMENT et al
as 2:2016cv00790
Plaintiff:
MELISSA EDMONDS
Defendant:
ALLEGHENY HEALTH DEPARTMENT, DONALD STECHSCHULTE and ALLEGHENY COUNTY JAIL
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
JACKSON v. DELBALSO et al
as 2:2016cv02950
Petitioner:
EDMOND JACKSON
Respondent:
THERESA DELBALSO, SETH WILLIAMS and THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Darryl Edmonds v. Superintendent Huntingdon SCI, et al
as 16-2540
Plaintiff - Appellant:
DARRYL EDMONDS
Defendant - Appellee:
SUPERINTENDENT HUNTINGDON SCI, DISTRICT ATTORNEY DELAWARE COUNTY and ATTORNEY GENERAL PENNSYLVANIA
JACKSON v. FISHER et al
as 2:2014cv01448
Petitioner:
EDMOND JACKSON
Respondent:
JON FISHER and THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Brucestan Jordan v. Edmond Cicchi, et al
as 14-3512
Plaintiff - Appellant:
BRUCESTAN T. JORDAN
Defendant - Appellee:
EDMOND CICCHI and BRIAN J. FENYAK
RIVIERE v. COUNTY OF MIDDLESEX et al
as 3:2014cv04686
Plaintiff:
MANOUCHEKA RIVIERE
Defendant:
COUNTY OF MIDDLESEX, MIDDLESEX COUNTY SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT, MIDDLESEX COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Yusef Steele v. Warden Cicchi, et al
as 14-3127
Plaintiff - Appellant:
YUSEF STEELE
Defendant - Appellee:
EDMOND CICCHI, DEPUTY WARDEN F. MASONE, INTERNAL AFFAIRS SGT DEAMICIS 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.
