Cases 1 - 10 of 32
ORTIZ v. SCOTT et al
as 2:2023cv00274
Plaintiff:
NELSON ORTIZ
Defendant:
B. SCOTT, GHEYA CALHOUN-BUTLER, NURSE GODWIN and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Gary Calhoun v. Superintendent Houtzdale SCI, et al
as 22-3374
Plaintiff / Appellant:
GARY CALHOUN
Defendant / Appellee:
SUPERINTENDENT HOUTZDALE SCI, ATTORNEY GENERAL PENNSYLVANIA and DISTRICT ATTORNEY CAMBRIA COUNTY
HARRIS v. COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA et al
as 1:2022cv00217
Petitioner:
TELLY HARRIS
Respondent:
COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA, AUBREA HAGERTY, HOFFMAN HILLARY and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
KROLL v. HIGGINS et al
as 3:2021cv00207
Plaintiff:
JOHN L. KROLL
Defendant:
WILLIAM J. HIGGINS, JR., ANTHONY ZANONI, MICHAEL O. TWIGG and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr
HAYNES v. DECANINI et al
as 2:2021cv00079
Defendant:
DPTY. WARDEN WHITE, LT. CIPOLLA, C/O HERMAN and others
Plaintiff:
PATRICK HAYNES
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr
CALHOUN v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
as 2:2019cv05547
Defendant:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Plaintiff:
DAVID CALHOUN
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255
SPEIGHT v. EDWARDS et al
as 2:2019cv20742
Defendant:
G. CALHOUN-BUTLER, RONALD P. EDWARDS, MICHAEL A. CONRAD and others
Plaintiff:
KELVIN C. SPEIGHT
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
CALHOUN v. COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA et al
as 2:2019cv02533
Respondent:
THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY OF THE COUNTY OF PHILADELPHIA, COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA and THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA
Petitioner:
DAVID CALHOUN
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
CALHOUN v. 61 PA STAT 331.21 (1941)
as 2:2017cv04535
Plaintiff:
TROY CALHOUN
Defendant:
61 PA STAT 331.21 (1941)
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
CALHOUN v. SMITH et al
as 3:2017cv00025
Petitioner:
GARY CALHOUN
Respondent:
BARRY SMITH, ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA and DISTRICT ATTORNEY OF CAMBRIA COUNTY
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
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.
