Cases 11 - 20 of 35
MAYER v. LANE et al
as 2:2017cv00586
Petitioner:
JACK MAYER
Respondent:
JAY LANE, THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA and THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY OF THE COUNTY OF CHESTER
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
BENDER v. BERRIER et al
as 2:2017cv00406
Plaintiff:
SHAWN BENDER
Defendant:
SUSAN BERRIER, MELINIE NAGGY, MULROY and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr Prisoner Civil Rights
MAYO v. OPPMAN et al
as 2:2017cv00311
Plaintiff:
WILLIAM MAYO
Defendant:
MICHAEL OPPMAN, DARLA COWDEN and JAY LANE
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
OTERO v. LANE et al
as 1:2016cv00287
Petitioner:
RICHARD DANIEL OTERO
Respondent:
JAY LANE, ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA and DISTRICT ATTORNEY OF WARREN COUNTY
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
FELLS v. LANE et al
as 2:2016cv01541
Petitioner:
WELDON WALTER FELLS
Respondent:
JAY LANE , BRUCE BEEMER and DISTRICT ATTORNEY OF ALLEGHENY COUNTY
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
DORSEY v. LANE et al
as 2:2016cv01485
Petitioner:
JAMES EARL DORSEY
Respondent:
JAY LANE and THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
TORRES v. BUZAS et al
as 2:2016cv01394
Plaintiff:
HECTOR VARGAS TORRES
Defendant:
STEPHEN BUZAS, GARY DOBISH, PUTMAN and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr Prisoner Civil Rights
COHEN v. LANE et al
as 2:2016cv01295
Petitioner:
ANDRE COHEN
Respondent:
JAY LANE and THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
INGRAM v. MILLER et al
as 2:2016cv01191
Plaintiff:
STEVEN INGRAM
Defendant:
MILLER and J. LANE
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr Prisoner Civil Rights
DOBSON v. SUPERINTENDENT, SCI FAYETTE JAY LANE et al
as 2:2016cv01056
Petitioner:
CORDELL DOBSON
Respondent:
SUPERINTENDENT, SCI FAYETTE JAY LANE , ATTORNEY GENERAL COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA and DISTRICT ATTORNEY, ALLEGHENY COUNTY, STEVEN A. ZAPPALA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
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.
