Cases 1 - 10 of 49
TALBERT v. IRWIN et al
as 1:2024cv00122
Plaintiff:
CHARLES TALBERT
Defendant:
RANDY IRWIN, JOHN BLICHA, IAN GUSTAFSON and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441 cr Notice of Removal - Civil Rights
Simon v. BOP Allenwood Low
as 1:2023cv00256
Petitioner:
Daryl Simon
Respondent:
BOP Allenwood Low
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
FITZGERALD v. PENNSYLVANIA PAROLE BOARD et al
as 2:2022cv00181
Petitioner:
DAVID WONTAE FITZGERALD
Respondent:
PENNSYLVANIA PAROLE BOARD, JENNIFER SCHAEFFER, NATHAN SIMON and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Simon v. Smith et al
as 1:2021cv00970
Defendant:
Sgt. Bower, Lt. Trevethan, Dr. Ashton and others
Plaintiff:
Robert Simon
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
WOODSON v. SHEESLEY et al
as 1:2020cv00310
Defendant:
JODI SHEESLEY, BRIAN SIMONS, I. GUSTAFSON and others
Plaintiff:
STEVEN W. WOODSON, JR.
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr
EASLEY v. OBERLANDER et al
as 1:2020cv00156
Plaintiff:
WARREN EASLEY
Defendant:
JOHN VETZEL, ERNIE MANGELUZZO, DR. WRIGHT and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
EASLEY v. OPERLANDER et al
as 1:2020cv00151
Defendant:
JOHN WETZEL, TABE BICKELL, DR. WRIGHT and others
Plaintiff:
WARREN EASLEY
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr
SIMON v. DELBALSO et al
as 2:2019cv04263
Respondent:
THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA, THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY OF THE COUNTY OF MONTGOMERY and THERESA DELBALSO
Petitioner:
TYUAN SIMON
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
EASLEY v. REUBERG et al
as 1:2019cv00223
Defendant:
REUBERG, ADAMS, SAWTELLI and others
Plaintiff:
WARREN EASLEY
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr
DOE v. ALLEGHENY COUNTY et al
as 2:2019cv00954
Defendant:
DAN HANCOCK, SIMON WAINWRIGHT, ORLANDO HARPER and others
Plaintiff:
JANE DOE
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.
