Cases 1 - 10 of 98
EDMONDS v. KNIGHT
as 2:2023cv01953
Plaintiff:
MRS. MELISSA EDMONDS
Defendant:
FELIESHA KNIGHT
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr Prisoner Civil Rights
EDMONDS v. MEDICAL DEPARTMENT et al
as 2:2023cv01739
Plaintiff:
MELISSA EDMONDS
Defendant:
MEDICAL DEPARTMENT, ALLEGHENY COUNTY JAIL and SGT JUSTICE
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr Prisoner Civil Rights
EDMONDS v. HARPER et al
as 2:2023cv01242
Plaintiff:
MELISSA EDMONDS
Defendant:
WARDEN HARPER and DAVID URBAN
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr Prisoner Civil Rights
EDMONDS v. ALLEGHENY COUNTY JAIL
as 2:2023cv01243
Plaintiff:
MELISSA EDMONDS
Defendant:
ALLEGHENY COUNTY JAIL
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr Prisoner Civil Rights
Edmond v. USA
as 4:2023cv00411
Petitioner:
Rayful Edmond, III
Respondent:
USA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255 Motion to Vacate / Correct Illegal Sentenc
Timmons v. Edmonds et al
as 1:2023cv00107
Plaintiff:
Brandon Timmons
Defendant:
C.O. Edmonds, J. Simpson, C.O. Warford and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
EDMONDS v. SEMPLE et al
as 2:2022cv00653
Plaintiff:
SCOTT A. EDMONDS
Defendant:
ROSE A. SEMPLE and JOHN F. DISALLE
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr Prisoner Civil Rights
BENTON v. STANZIONE et al
as 2:2022cv01476
Plaintiff:
EDMOND BENTON
Defendant:
MRS. DOREEN STANZIONE, MRS. SHANTAY BRAME ADAMS, SGT. GROSSKROPF and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Jamir Edmonds v. Superintendent Fayette SCI, et al
as 22-1418
Plaintiff / Appellant:
JAMIR EDMONDS
Defendant:
SUPERINTENDENT FAYETTE SCI
Defendant / Appellee:
DISTRICT ATTORNEY DELAWARE COUNTY and ATTORNEY GENERAL PENNSYLVANIA
EDMONDS v. CAPOZZA et al
as 2:2020cv06161
Petitioner:
JAMIR EDMONDS
Respondent:
THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA, MARK CAPOZZA and THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY OF THE COUNTY OF DELAWARE
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.
