Cases 31 - 40 of 185
KOEHLER v. LAWLER et al
as 2:2011cv01950
Petitioner:
SAMUEL KOEHLER
Respondent:
RAYMOND LAWLER, THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY OF THE COUNTY OF PHILADELPHIA and THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Stewart v. Lawler et al
as 3:2011cv00495
Petitioner:
Lonnie Alexander Stewart
Respondent:
Raymond Lawler and PA State Attorney General
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
CORREA v. COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA et al
as 2:2011cv01833
Petitioner:
LUIS A. TEXIDOR CORREA
Respondent:
COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA, RAYMOND R. LAWLER and CORBIN
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241
LOWERY v. LAWLER et al
as 2:2011cv00190
Petitioner:
ALBERT LOWERY
Respondent:
LAWLER , S. A. ZAPPALA, JR. and TOM CORBITT
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
BROADUS v. LAWLER et al
as 2:2011cv00105
Petitioner:
CORDELL DUANE BROADUS
Respondent:
RAYMOND M. LAWLER and THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Albert Baxter v. R. Lawler, et al
as 10-4707
Plaintiff - Appellant:
ALBERT BAXTER
Defendant - Appellee:
R. M. LAWLER and DA PHILADELPHIA
RODRIGUEZ v. LAWLER et al
as 5:2010cv07556
Petitioner:
HECTOR RODRIGUEZ
Respondent:
R.M. LAWLER, THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY OF THE COUNTY OF LANCASTER and THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Victor Strong v. Raymond Lawler, et al
as 10-4727
Plaintiff - Appellant:
VICTOR B STRONG
Defendant - Appellee:
RAYMOND LAWLER, DA PHILADELPHIA and ATTY GEN PA
Casey Dooley v. Raymond Lawler, et al
as 10-4623
Plaintiff - Appellant:
CASEY DOOLEY
Defendant - Appellee:
RAYMOND LAWLER, Superintendent of SCI Huntingdon, COUNTY OF PHILADELPHIA and ATTY GEN PA
Lance v. Lawler et al
as 3:2010cv02481
Petitioner:
Thomas Lance
Respondent:
Raymond M. Lawler and PA State Attorney General
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.
