Cases 31 - 40 of 43
BROOKS v. REIFER et al
as 2:2018cv03510
Defendant:
MR. JOHN REIFER, MR. HOLENICK, FRANCIS PARIZOLLA and others
Plaintiff:
NAZARIO BROOKS
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2016cv02081
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights (Employment Discrimination)
PRACHT v. WETZEL et al
as 3:2015cv00261
Plaintiff:
NICHOLAS ALBERT PRACHT
Defendant:
JOHN WETZEL, KENNETH R. CAMERON, MR. MUBALAJ WUJUOLA and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
OLIVER v. MR. JOHN PORTABLE SANITATION UNITS, INC. et al
as 2:2015cv06431
Plaintiff:
SCOTT OLIVER
Defendant:
MR. JOHN PORTABLE SANITATION UNITS, INC. , ROBERT H SUESSMANN , JOHN DOES 1-10 and others
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 201
DiMatteo v. Raymond et al
as 1:2015cv00066
Defendant:
Raymond, Mr. John Thomas Raymond, Mr. Kevin Kelly and others
Plaintiff:
DiMatteo and Deborah DiMatteo
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
ESCOBAR v. WETZEL et al
as 2:2012cv06739
Defendant:
SHARRONNA HOLMES, MR. JOHN E. WETZEL, COUNSELOR MARY and others
Plaintiff:
IVAN ESCOBAR
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
ELIASON v. MR. JOHN KERESTES et al
as 3:2011cv00038
Petitioner:
TODD ELIASON
Respondent:
MR. JOHN KERESTES, DISTRICT ATTORNEY OF THE COUNTY OF SCHYULKILL, ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
FORD v. CASSELLA et al
as 1:2010cv03711
Plaintiff:
MR. TODD C. FORD, JR.
Defendant:
MR. RONALD CASSELLA, MR. JOHN REILLY and MR. G. HARRISON WALTERS
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
HARRIS v. MR. JOHN YOST et al
as 3:2010cv00026
Petitioner:
GEORGE D. HARRIS
Respondent:
MR. JOHN YOST and MR. PEREHINEC
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Federal)
JACKSON v. MR. JOHN YOST
as 3:2009cv00081
Petitioner:
RAYMOND JACKSON
Respondent:
MR. JOHN YOST
Cause Of Action: Federal Question
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.
