Cases 1 - 10 of 39
CHATMAN et al v. LOCKE et al
as 2:2024cv00235
Plaintiff:
DAJUNT CHATMAN, DAJUNT PORTER, LASHAN BRYANT and others
Defendant:
DETECTIVE NORMAN LOCKE, OFFICER KIRK KOTCHIG, DAVID REICH and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr Prisoner Civil Rights
RICHARDS v. EDWARDS et al
as 1:2024cv00004
Plaintiff:
SAMUEL E. RICHARDS
Defendant:
M.J. EDWARDS, DR. BAIRD, NURSE SUPERVISOR LOCH and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr Prisoner Civil Rights
PIERRE v. BATES
as 1:2023cv00262
Plaintiff:
MACARTON N. PIERRE
Defendant:
SGT. BRIAN BATES, MELISSA GIROUX, LT. PARTCHE and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr Prisoner Civil Rights
WILLIAMS v. SPAGEL et al
as 1:2022cv00334
Plaintiff:
MICHAEL B. WILLIAMS, JR.
Defendant:
EDWARD SPAGEL, OFFICER PETER DREGALLA, BALESK and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr Prisoner Civil Rights
Snype v. Jamison et al
as 3:2022cv00831
Plaintiff:
Vernon Snype
Defendant:
J.L. Jamison and Recreation Supervisor Locke
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Federal Question: Other Civil Rights
Locke v. Pennsylvania Department of Corrections et al
as 3:2021cv01633
Plaintiff:
Daryl Locke
Defendant:
Pennsylvania Department of Corrections and Rupert Samuel
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
MIDDLEBROOKS v. NARDELLI et al
as 1:2021cv12497
Defendant:
CORRECTIONAL OFFICER BENNET, ADMINISTRATOR ERIN NARDELLI and CORRECTIONAL OFFICER LOCKE
Plaintiff:
TRAVIS MIDDLEBROOKS
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
LOCKE v. WSZOLEK et al
as 3:2021cv01219
Plaintiff:
EDWARD LOCKE
Defendant:
DR. AHMAR SHAKIR and JOSEPH WSZOLEK
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
CRAWFORD v. LOCKE et al
as 2:2020cv01417
Defendant:
NAKKIA LOCKE and NERC. MINOR
Plaintiff:
WILLIAM ROY CRAWFORD
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr
Locke v. Wetzel et al
as 3:2019cv00499
Defendant:
Swisher, P. Luther, Dribelbis and others
Plaintiff:
Daryl Locke
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
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.
