Cases 1 - 10 of 23
MCCANN v. PRIME CARE et al
as 3:2024cv00086
Plaintiff:
LONNIE MCCANN
Defendant:
PRIME CARE, CHRISTIAN SMITH, MR. DECALVISH and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr Prisoner Civil Rights
MCCANN v. CHERNISKY et al
as 3:2023cv00308
Plaintiff:
LONNIE MCCANN
Defendant:
THOMAS C. CHERNISKY, WARDEN SMITH, CAPTAIN WOLFORD and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr Prisoner Civil Rights
SHAW v. COUNTY OF FAYETTE EMPLOYEES et al
as 2:2023cv01954
Plaintiff:
JADEN SHAW
Defendant:
COUNTY OF FAYETTE EMPLOYEES, CLYDE BRANSON, JOHN LANKY and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr Prisoner Civil Rights
KENDRICK v. SHAW
as 2:2022cv01805
Plaintiff:
PAUL KENDRICK
Defendant:
C.O. SHAW
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr Prisoner Civil Rights
ANGLE v. LITTLE et al
as 2:2022cv01772
Plaintiff:
BRYAN ANGLE, II
Defendant:
SECRETARY LITTLE, SUPERINTENDENT ARMEL, DEPUTY WALKER and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441 cr Notice of Removal - Civil Rights
FARMER-SHAW v. WETZEL et al
as 1:2022cv00336
Plaintiff:
RASHAWN FARMER-SHAW
Defendant:
FORMER SEC JOHN WETZEL, FOMER SUPT CLARK, SUPT OLIVER and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr Prisoner Civil Rights
SHAW v. UNITED STATES et al
as 2:2022cv00492
Plaintiff:
DONNELLE SHAW
Defendant:
UNITED STATES, UNITED NATIONS and BUTLER COUNTY PRISON
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr Prisoner Civil Rights
FLICK v. MASON et al
as 3:2020cv00252
Respondent:
WILLIAM SHAW, ATTORNEY GENERAL JOSH SHAPIRO and BERNADETTE MASON
Petitioner:
THOMAS EDWARD FLICK
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
DUNMIRE v. KOCH et al
as 2:2019cv01295
Plaintiff:
JERAN DUNMIRE
Defendant:
OFFICER R KOCH and LT. SHAW
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr
SHAW v. WARDEN FCI MCKEAN
as 1:2017cv00253
Petitioner:
KEITH SHAW
Respondent:
WARDEN FCI MCKEAN
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Federal)
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.
