Cases 1 - 10 of 12
Richard v. Smith et al
as 3:2024cv00089
Plaintiff:
CARL RICHARD
Defendant:
SUPERINTENDENT BARRY SMITH, WELLPATH MEDICAL CO., DR. MUHAMMAD NAJI and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr Prisoner Civil Rights
PATRICK v. DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS et al
as 1:2023cv00352
Plaintiff:
CHRISTIAN PATRICK
Defendant:
DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS doing business as SCI FOREST, RANDY IRWIN, IAN GUSTAFSON and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr Prisoner Civil Rights
NGUYEN v. KAUFMAN et al
as 3:2023cv00112
Plaintiff:
ANTHONY NGUYEN
Defendant:
PA ELLIS KAUFMAN, PA TESTA, PA ROXANNE PLAYSO and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr Prisoner Civil Rights
AULENBACHER v. DOE 1-10
as 1:2023cv00032
Plaintiff:
PAUL J. AULENBACHER
Defendant:
JOHN DOE 1-10, CO JOHN DOE 1-10, CERT TEAM JOHN DOE 1-10 and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr Prisoner Civil Rights
GLENN v. DANCHA et al
as 3:2022cv00158
Plaintiff:
TYRONE GLENN
Defendant:
ANDREW DANCHA, WELLPATH CARE and PENNSYLVANIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr Prisoner Civil Rights
MEDINA v. JONES et al
as 1:2022cv00073
Plaintiff:
MARIO MEDINA
Defendant:
OFFICER JONES, SERGEANT WINGER, JOHN DOE 1 and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441 cr Notice of Removal - Civil Rights
PRATT v. WELLPATH
as 2:2021cv01279
Defendant:
WELLPATH and CORRECT CARE SOLUTIONS, LLC
Plaintiff:
EUGENE PRATT
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr
COSGROVE v. WELLPATH et al
as 3:2021cv00124
Defendant:
WELLPATH, CORRECT CARE SOLUTIONS, LLC, MUHAMMAD NAJI and others
Plaintiff:
JAMES COSGROVE
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr
BEGANDY v. WELLPATH et al
as 1:2021cv00213
Defendant:
WELLPATH, CORRECT CARE SOLUTIONS LLC, AMANDA HARTWELL and others
Plaintiff:
JUSTIN BEGANDY
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr
COSGROVE v. WELLPATH et al
as 3:2021cv00092
Defendant:
WELLPATH, CORRECT CARE SOLUTIONS, LLC and MUHAMMAD NAJI
Plaintiff:
JAMES COSGROVE
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.
