Cases 1 - 10 of 24
Smith, Sr. v. McGinley et al
as 3:2023cv01456
Plaintiff:
Mark E. Smith, Sr.
Defendant:
Thomas S. McGinley
Respondent:
District Attorney of Monroe County and Pennsylvania Attorney General's Office
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
SMITH v. DAUPHIN COUNTY DOMESTICS
as 1:2021cv00236
Plaintiff:
Charles E Smith
Defendant:
Dauphin County Domestics
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Smith v. Saul
as 3:2020cv00008
Plaintiff:
William E Smith
Defendant:
Andrew M. Saul
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 405
Markle v. Hoffman et al
as 4:2018cv02037
Plaintiff:
Joseph R. Markle
Defendant:
Police Chief Reynolds, Harry E. Smith and Sgt. Bruce Hoffman
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Smith v. Commonwealth of Pennsylvania et al
as 1:2018cv01241
Plaintiff:
Charles E. Smith
Defendant:
Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, Swatara Township Police Department and Dauphin County Booking Center
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Smith v. Commonwealth of Pennsylvania et al
as 1:2018cv00838
Petitioner:
Charles E. Smith
Respondent:
Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, Clark and PA Attorney General
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Smith v. Monroe County et al
as 3:2018cv00026
Plaintiff:
Johnny E. Smith
Defendant:
Monroe County, Monroe County Correctional Facility, Garry Haidel and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Smith v. Commonwealth of Pennsylvania et al
as 1:2017cv02339
Petitioner:
Charles E. Smith
Respondent:
Commonwealth of Pennsylvania and PA State Attorney General
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Smith v. Commonwealth of Pennsylvania et al
as 1:2017cv00427
Petitioner:
Charles E. Smith
Respondent:
Commonwealth of Pennslvania, Dauphin County Prosecutor's Office, Pennsylvania Supreme Court and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Perez v. Valley Hotel et al
as 4:2017cv00113
Plaintiff:
Thomas E. Perez
Defendant:
Valley Hotel and Thomas E. Smith
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 201
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.
