Cases 31 - 40 of 118
RAMSEY v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
as 2:2016cv03477
Plaintiff:
GARY RAMSEY
Defendant:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255
URYC v. CAMERON et al
as 5:2016cv01527
Respondent:
CAMERON , PA STATE ATTORNEY GENERAL and THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY OF LANCASTER COUNTY
Petitioner:
GARY WAYNE URYC
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
IGLESIAS v. IMPAUATO et al
as 2:2016cv00505
Plaintiff:
DAVIS IGLESIAS
Defendant:
IMPAUATO, TAYLOR, MCMILLEN and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
IGLESIAS v. PASCOE et al
as 2:2016cv00241
Plaintiff:
DAVIS L. IGLESIAS
Defendant:
PHILIP PASCOE, LUREN KEMPS, JACK HEALY and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
GERLACH v. COMMONWEALTH OF PA et al
as 5:2015cv06015
Petitioner:
GARY CHARLES GERLACH
Respondent:
COMMONWEALTH OF PA and PA ATTORNEY GENERAL
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
CODNER v. WARDEN-PIKE COUNTY et al
as 5:2015cv05176
Petitioner:
GARY LEAFORD CODNER
Respondent:
WARDEN-PIKE COUNTY, PA STATE ATTORNEY GENERAL and THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY OF BERKS COUNTY
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
UPSHUR v. CITY OF PHILADELPHIA et al
as 2:2015cv04688
Plaintiff:
ALBERT UPSHUR
Defendant:
CITY OF PHILADELPHIA, MICHAEL NUTTER, CHARLES RAMSEY and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
MANN v. GILMORE et al
as 2:2015cv04591
Petitioner:
GARY MANN
Respondent:
SUPERINTENDENT GILMORE, THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY OF THE COUNTY OF PHILADELPHIA and THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
BATTAGLINI v. LABOR et al
as 2:2015cv03909
Plaintiff:
GARY BATTAGLINI
Defendant:
FRANK LABOR, III and JOHN AUGUSTINE
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
ROBINSON v. S.C.I. CAMPHILL'S MEDICAL DEPT. et al
as 2:2015cv03647
Plaintiff:
GARY ROBINSON, SR.
Defendant:
S.C.I. CAMPHILL'S MEDICAL DEPT. and SHOOP
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.
