Cases 1 - 10 of 28
EDWARDS v. ENNIS
as 1:2023cv00298
Plaintiff:
RASHAN EDWARDS
Defendant:
MAJ. ENNIS, MAJOR ENNIS, MAJOR/CAPTAIN SISSEM and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr Prisoner Civil Rights
MOSLEY v. BARTLE et al
as 2:2023cv04169
Plaintiff:
JAMES MOSLEY
Defendant:
HARVEY BARTLE, III, L. FELIPE RESTREPO, FLOYD J. MILLER and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
SWINT v. OLIVER et al
as 1:2023cv00102
Plaintiff:
CHARLES SWINT
Defendant:
L.J. OLIVER, EARL JONES, MRS. RANDELL and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr Prisoner Civil Rights
NUNEZ BRAVO v. CITY OF PHILADELPHIA et al
as 2:2022cv05190
Plaintiff:
LISSETTE NUNEZ BRAVO
Defendant:
THE CITY OF PHILADELPHIA, CORIZON HEALTH INC., MHM CORRECTIONAL SERVICES LLC doing business as MHM SERVICES INC. AND PARENT COMPANY CENTURION HEALTH and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
JACKSON v. CITY OF PHILADELPHIA et al
as 2:2022cv03527
Plaintiff:
DANTE JACKSON
Defendant:
CITY OF PHILADELPHIA, CORIZON HEALTH INC., CORRECTIONAL OFFICER LISA CRESPO and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
DEANS v. FLOYD
as 1:2021cv00362
Plaintiff:
DARRIAN DEANS
Defendant:
AUGUSTUS FLOYD
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr Prisoner Civil Rights
NOLEN v. DR. TOLNAY et al
as 1:2020cv00140
Defendant:
DMD DR. TOLNAY and PA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS
Plaintiff:
FLOYD J. NOLEN
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr
DICKSON v. ENNIS et al
as 1:2020cv00001
Defendant:
MR. FLOYD, BRYAN E. FLINCHBAUGH, PAUL A. ENNIS and others
Plaintiff:
JAMES ELIAH DICKSON
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr
PATTERSON v. QUIGLEY et al
as 5:2016cv01604
Plaintiff:
FLOYD E. PATTERSON, JR.
Defendant:
JANINE L. QUIGLEY, KEVIN S. BARNHART, MARK C. SCOTT and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
FLOYD v. DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS PA et al
as 3:2016cv00278
Plaintiff:
ANTHONY LEONARD FLOYD
Defendant:
BLOUSH
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.
