Cases 1 - 10 of 23
BOYD v. CLARK et al
as 1:2016cv00264
Petitioner:
ALONZO R. BOYD
Respondent:
MICHAEL CLARK, ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA - KATHLEEN G. KANE and PENNSYLVANIA BOARD OF PROBATION AND PAROLE
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
CARTER v. WARDEN AT SCI FRACKVILLE et al
as 1:2016cv00034
Plaintiff:
HOWARD A. CARTER
Defendant:
WARDEN AT SCI FRACKVILLE and KATHLEEN G. KANE
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
CARTER v. KANE et al
as 1:2016cv00032
Plaintiff:
HOWARD A. CARTER
Defendant:
KATHLEEN G. KANE, MICHALE KLOPOTOSKI, THOMAS LAVAN and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
CARTER v. KANE et al
as 1:2016cv00033
Plaintiff:
HOWARD A. CARTER
Defendant:
KATHLEEN G. KANE, ROBERT E. COLVILLE, STEPHEN A. ZAPPALLA, JR. and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
CARTER v. KANE et al
as 1:2016cv00035
Plaintiff:
HOWARD A. CARTER
Defendant:
KATHLEEN G. KANE, DANIEL P. BURNS, JAMES C. BARNACLE and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
CARTER v. KANE et al
as 1:2016cv00031
Plaintiff:
HOWARD A. CARTER
Defendant:
KATHLEEN G. KANE, SCI PITTSBURGH MEDICAL DEPARTMENT and EX WARDEN OF SCI PITTSBURGH
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
CARTER v. KANE et al
as 1:2016cv00036
Plaintiff:
HOWARD A. CARTER
Defendant:
KATHLEEN G. KANE, BRIAN V. COLEMAN, JAMES C. BARNACLE and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
CARTER v. KANE et al
as 1:2016cv00007
Plaintiff:
HOWARD A. CARTER
Defendant:
KATHLEEN G. KANE, BRIAN COLEMEN, DARRELL O. DUGAN and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
YOHN v. OVERMYER et al
as 3:2015cv00312
Petitioner:
EDWARD YOHN
Respondent:
MICHAEL D. OVERMYER and KATHLEEN G. KANE
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
FITZGERALD v. MAHALLY et al
as 2:2015cv01221
Petitioner:
ANTHONY FITZGERALD
Respondent:
LAWRENCE MAHALLY and KATHLEEN G. KANE
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
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.
