Cases 1 - 10 of 15
Charles Bellon v. Superintendent Benner Township SCI
as 22-1602
Plaintiff / Appellant:
CHARLES BELLON
Defendant / Appellee:
SUPERINTENDENT BENNER TOWNSHIP SCI
BELLON v. HOUSER et al
as 3:2022cv00044
Petitioner:
CHARLES BELLON
Respondent:
MORRIS HOUSER, THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA and DISTRICT ATTORNEY OF BLAIR COUNTY
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
In re: Charles Bellon
as 21-2638
Petitioner:
In re: CHARLES BELLON
Respondent:
TAMMY FERGUSON, Superintendent of SCI Benner Township, JOSHUA D. SHAPIRO, individually and in his official capacity as Commonwealth of Pennsylvania Attorney General, CHRISTOPHER D. SCHMIDT, individually and in his official capacity as County of Blair Deputy Attorney General and others
BELLON v. SHAPIRO et al
as 3:2021cv00100
Defendant:
JOSHUA D. SHAPIRO and CHRISTOPHER J. SCHMIDT
Plaintiff:
CHARLES BELLON
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr
BELLON v. JOHNSON & JOHNSON, INC et al
as 3:2020cv14202
In Re:
JOHNSON & JOHNSON TALCUM POWDER PRODUCTS MARKETING, SALES PRACTICES AND PRODUCTS LIABILITY LITIGATION
Plaintiff:
ARLIN BELLON
Defendant:
JOHNSON & JOHNSON CONSUMER, INC and JOHNSON & JOHNSON, INC
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Charles Bellon v. Superintendent Benner Township
as 19-3506
Plaintiff / Appellant:
CHARLES BELLON
Defendant / Appellee:
SUPERINTENDENT BENNER TOWNSHIP SCI
BELLONE et al v. STONE et al
as 3:2019cv09408
Plaintiff:
ROBERT M BELLONE and ANTONIETTE BELLONE
Defendant:
JOHN DOES 1-10, ABC COMPANIES 1-10, TONY R STONE and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
BOYD v. GUARDUCCI et al
as 2:2019cv08735
Defendant:
OFFICER A. SOSA, R. SCHARPRICK, D. BURK and others
Plaintiff:
LEROY BOYD
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
In re: Charles Bellon
as 16-2092
Petitioner:
In re: CHARLES BELLON
Respondent:
SUPERINTENDENT BENNER TOWNSHIP SCI
Nominal Respondent:
KIM R. GIBSON
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.
