Cases 1 - 10 of 13
DAVIS v. PENNSYLVANIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS et al
as 3:2021cv00135
Plaintiff:
KEITH VERNON DAVIS
Respondent:
PENNSYLVANIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, JOHN WETZEL, Superintendent BARRY R. SMITH and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr
BRONSON v. VAUGHN et al
as 3:2021cv00127
Plaintiff:
PURCELL BRONSON
Defendant:
T. VAUGHN, B. SMITH, MR. NUNEZ and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441 cr
Leaphart v. Campbell, et al
as 1:2021cv01293
Plaintiff:
Harold E. Leaphart
Defendant:
William A. Campbell, J. B. Merrits, II, J. Kirsch and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
HECKER v. CENTRAL INTELLIGENCE AGENCY et al
as 2:2021cv02701
Defendant:
SEARGENT WHARTON, JIMMY KIMMEL, CENTRAL INTELLIGENCE AGENCY and others
Plaintiff:
CHRISTOPHER R HECKER
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Davis v. Pennsylvania Department of Corrections et al
as 4:2021cv00826
Defendant:
E. Miller, Joel Barrows, John Wetzel and others
Plaintiff:
Keith Vernon Davis
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
DENNIS v. SMITH et al
as 3:2020cv00017
Defendant:
MAJOR J.R. BARROWS, SERGEANT NYMAN, D. VARNER and others
Plaintiff:
JEFFREY DENNIS
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr
Stockton v. Wetzel et al
as 3:2019cv01930
Defendant:
C.O. M. Miller, P.S.S.-B Dubler, HEX Shawn Wiggins and others
Plaintiff:
Ronald Stockton
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Stockton v. Wetzel et al
as 3:2019cv01748
Defendant:
Major Barrows, John Wetzel, Captain Acey and others
Plaintiff:
Ronald Stockton
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Stockton v. Smith et al
as 3:2019cv01429
Defendant:
Sgt. Vereshack, D.J. Close, C.O. Reyman and others
Plaintiff:
Ronald Stockton
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Stockton v. Secretary of Corrections et al
as 3:2019cv01306
Defendant:
D.J. Close, C.O. M. Miller, Knowles and others
Not Yet Classified:
C.O. Lancass
Plaintiff:
Ronald Stockton
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
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.
