Cases 21 - 30 of 204
Brown v. Martin et al
as 3:2019cv01087
Defendant:
Lea Martin and Lawrence Mahally
Plaintiff:
Rubin Brown
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441
Evans v. Mahally et al
as 4:2019cv01112
Defendant:
Giselle Malet, Ransome, Lawrence P. Mahally and others
Plaintiff:
Donald Aldrigo Evans
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Muhammad v. Martin et al
as 3:2019cv01316
Defendant:
Lea Martin, SCI - Dallas and Lawrence Mahally
Plaintiff:
Abdullah Muhammad
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Mayo v. Wetzel et al
as 3:2019cv00965
Defendant:
Dorine Varner, Carole Mattis, Robeciewski and others
Plaintiff:
Alfred Alonzo Mayo
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
ROYSTER v. MAHALLY et al
as 2:2019cv02126
Respondent:
THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF PA, THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY OF THE COUNTY OF PHILA and LAWRENCE MAHALLY
Petitioner:
TELLY ROYSTER
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Vincent Huntley v. Lawrence Mahally, et al
as 19-1736
Defendant / Appellee:
LAWRENCE MAHALLY and ATTORNEY GENERAL PENNSYLVANIA
Plaintiff / Appellant:
VINCENT V. HUNTLEY
CHABB v. MAHALLY et al
as 2:2019cv00913
Petitioner:
SAROEUN CHABB and SAROEUN CHHAB
Respondent:
THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY OF THE COUNTY OF PHILADELPHIA, LAWRENCE MAHALLY and THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
SOTO v. MAHALLY et al
as 2:2019cv00780
Petitioner:
PEDRO SOTO
Respondent:
LAWRENCE P. MAHALLY, THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA and THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY OF THE COUNTY OF PHILADELPHIA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Cooper v. Wetzel et al
as 1:2019cv00539
Defendant:
Lawrence Mahally, George Piskorik, John Wetzel and others
Plaintiff:
Bruce X. Cooper
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
LAMPKIN v. MAHALLY et al
as 2:2019cv01086
Petitioner:
TYRONE LAMPKIN
Respondent:
LAWRENCE P. MAHALLY, THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY OF THE COUNTY OF PENNSYLVANIA and THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA
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.
