Cases 21 - 30 of 77
EAVES v. CHESTER et al
as 2:2019cv00485
Defendant:
SIR CHRISTOPHER H. CHESTER, SIR ANDREW CHARLES BAILEY, NONSTOP COURIERS INC. and others
Plaintiff:
ANTHONY BRYANT EAVES
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
MOLSON v. DISANTIS et al
as 1:2019cv00037
Defendant:
MARCEL MALLORY, JUDGE JOHN GAHART, MARK SAUDER and others
Plaintiff:
ROWENA MOLSON
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
BRYANT v. WARDEN, SCI FAYETTE et al
as 2:2018cv01671
Petitioner:
JULIAN BRYANT
Respondent:
ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA, DISTRICT ATTORNEY OF ALLEGHENY COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA and WARDEN, SCI FAYETTE
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
MOLSON v. SEYMOUR et al
as 1:2018cv00337
Defendant:
MARCEL MALLORY, MICHAEL HOLMAN, R. KEVIN SUTTER and others
Plaintiff:
ROWENA MOLSON
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
JOHNSON v. CLARK et al
as 1:2018cv00294
Respondent:
ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA, DISTRICT ATTORNEY OF BERKS COUNTY and SUPT. MICHAEL CLARK
Petitioner:
BRYANT K. JOHNSON
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
MOLSON v. BRYANT et al
as 1:2018cv00274
Defendant:
FAITH HAUGHTON, MARCEL MALLORY, MICHAEL HOLMAN and others
Plaintiff:
ROWENA MOLSON
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1983
PETOFF v. HOLMAN et al
as 1:2018cv00156
Plaintiff:
THOMAS PETOFF
Defendant:
MICHAEL HOLMAN, GARY SEYMOUR and RONALD BRYANT
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
BRYANT v. BERRYHILL
as 2:2018cv00578
Plaintiff:
ANTIONETTE T. BRYANT
Defendant:
NANCY A. BERRYHILL
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 405 (g) Review of HHS Decision (SSID)
MASSEY v. HOLMAN et al
as 1:2017cv00292
Plaintiff:
WESLEY A. MASSEY
Defendant:
MICHAEL HOLMAN, D.W. BRYANT, JASON STEVENS and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
JOHNSON v. CLARK et al
as 1:2017cv00233
Petitioner:
BRYANT KEVIN JOHNSON
Respondent:
MICHAEL CLARK, ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA and DISTRICT ATTORNEY OF BERKS COUNTY
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.
