Cases 1 - 10 of 12
JONES v. GANSKY et al
as 2:2023cv02967
Plaintiff:
MACK JONES
Defendant:
JOSEPH GANSKY, JOSEPH GEORGE, MATTHEW TOBIE and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Snyder v. Warden of Franklin County Jail et al
as 4:2021cv01095
Respondent:
Pennsylvania Attorney General's Office and Warden of Franklin County Jail
Petitioner:
Toby Wayne Snyder
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
IN RE: DAVID T. SHULICK
as 2:2019cv03290
Petitioner:
DAVID T. SHULICK and TOBI GLATT
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241
Speraw v. Catone et al
as 1:2018cv02310
Defendant:
Shanna Cox, Gary Eichelberger, Toby Catone and others
Plaintiff:
David Nelson Speraw
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
TUCKER-SMART v. BUCKS COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA et al
as 2:2015cv00210
Plaintiff:
MICHAEL TUCKER-SMART
Defendant:
BUCKS COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA, BEN SALEM POLICE DEPARTMENT, GANSKI and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
WOOTEN v. WALSH
as 2:2013cv07347
Petitioner:
TOBY WOOTEN
Respondent:
JEROME WALSH
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Toby v. Lamas et al
as 3:2013cv02882
Petitioner:
Dennis Toby
Respondent:
Marirosa Lamas and PA State Attorney General
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Newsome v. Catone et al
as 3:2012cv02475
Plaintiff:
Brenton Boyd Newsome
Defendant:
Toby Catone, Prime Care Medical Inc., York County Prison and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
West v. County of York, Commonwealth of Pennsylvania et al
as 1:2012cv01564
Plaintiff:
Israel West
Defendant:
County of York, Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, York County Prison, Mary Sabol and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Bradley v. PrimeCare Medical Inc. et al
as 3:2012cv00292
Plaintiff:
Tracy Raynard Bradley
Defendant:
PrimeCare Medical Inc. , Toby Cantone , Phil for PMC and others
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.
