Cases 11 - 20 of 43
ARNOLD v. PRISON HEALTH SERVICES et al
as 3:2013cv00015
Plaintiff:
RODNEY NEAL ARNOLD
Defendant:
PRISON HEALTH SERVICES and WERNER EYE ASSOCIATES
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr Prisoner Civil Rights
FORREST v. SAUERS et al
as 1:2012cv00319
Plaintiff:
MICHAEL FORREST
Defendant:
DEBRA K. SAUERS, MAURIN, JOHN DOE 1 and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr Prisoner Civil Rights
SPENCER v. PRISON HEALTH SERVICES, INC. et al
as 1:2012cv00062
Plaintiff:
RAVANNA SPENCER
Defendant:
PRISON HEALTH SERVICES, INC., TONLAY and MAXINE OVERTON
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
FLYNN v. SCI HOUTZDALE et al
as 3:2012cv00019
Plaintiff:
MICHAEL FLYNN
Defendant:
SCI HOUTZDALE, KNISELY, MORRISON and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
HOOVER v. CAMERON et al
as 3:2011cv00261
Petitioner:
HARRY HOOVER
Respondent:
KENNETH CAMERON and PRISON HEALTH SERVICES, INC.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
WASHINGTON v. FOLINO et al
as 2:2011cv01046
Plaintiff:
HENRY UNSELD WASHINGTON
Defendant:
LOUIS S. FOLINO, BYUNGHAK JIN, PRISON HEALTH SERVICES, INC. and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
FARRELL v. PENNA. CORRECTIONAL INDUSTRIES et al
as 3:2011cv00103
Plaintiff:
M. FARRELL
Defendant:
PENNA. CORRECTIONAL INDUSTRIES, DENNIS DIPAOLA, JIM DONNELLY and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2010cv01764
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
BROWN v. BEARD et al
as 2:2010cv01398
Plaintiff:
ALTON D. BROWN
Defendant:
JEFFREY A. BEARD, DAVID DIGUGLIELMO, DORINA VARNER and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr Prisoner Civil Rights
BAILEY v. PENNSYLVANIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS et al
as 2:2010cv01039
Plaintiff:
ED BAILEY
Defendant:
PENNSYLVANIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, PRISON HEALTH SERVICES and MEYERS
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr Prisoner Civil Rights
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.
