Cases 1 - 10 of 62
Chandhok v. Washington
as 4:2024cv00115
Petitioner:
Angad Singh Chandhok
Respondent:
M. Washington
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
Chandhok v. Washington
as 4:2024cv00042
Petitioner:
Angad Singh Chandhok
Respondent:
Warden M. Washington
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
SINGH v. PITMAN
as 2:2023cv20366
Petitioner:
GURVINDER SINGH
Respondent:
YOLANDA PITMAN
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
MITCHELL v. COUNTY OF BERGEN et al
as 2:2023cv00596
Plaintiff:
ANTHONY MITCHELL
Defendant:
COUNTY OF BERGEN, BERGEN COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, BERGEN COUNTY ADULT CORRECTIONS and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Terrence Yoast v. Borough of Pottstown, et al
as 22-1960
Plaintiff / Appellant:
TERRENCE R. YOAST
Defendant / Appellee:
BOROUGH OF POTTSTOWN, COUNTY OF MONTGOMERY, PA d/b/d MCCF, RYAN VANDORICK, INDIVIDUAL AND OFFICIAL CAPACITY and others
Ryan Singh v. John Wetzel, et al
as 22-1775
Plaintiff / Appellant:
RYAN PAUL SINGH
Defendant / Appellee:
JOHN E. WETZEL, Pennsylvania Department of Corrections
SINGH v. ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF NEW JERSEY
as 3:2022cv00294
Petitioner:
AMARDEEP SINGH
Respondent:
ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF NEW JERSEY
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
SINGH v. MCCARTHY
as 3:2021cv20380
Plaintiff:
AMARDEEP SINGH
Defendant:
CHRISTINE MCCARTHY
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
SINGH v. THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF NEW JERSEY
as 3:2021cv20201
Petitioner:
HARPAL SINGH
Respondent:
THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF NEW JERSEY
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
SINGH v. THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF NEW JERSEY
as 3:2021cv12985
Respondent:
THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF NEW JERSEY
Petitioner:
HARPAL SINGH
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.
