Cases 1 - 10 of 14
DARDEN v. LAMAS et al
as 2:2022cv04054
Plaintiff:
MATTHEW DARDEN
Defendant:
MARIROSA LAMAS, KENNETH M. EASON, MS. SHIRLEY LAWS-SMITH and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
MACK-TANSMORE v. MR. JONES et al
as 2:2020cv00689
Defendant:
S.P. GREEN, MR. JONES, MS. QUINN and others
Plaintiff:
HASHEAM MACK-TANSMORE
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
GILLMORE v. LAMAS et al
as 2:2019cv05571
Plaintiff:
MARSHALL GILLMORE
Defendant:
MARIROSA LAMAS, B. ADAMS, M. QUINN and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
PEPE v. LAMAS et al
as 2:2019cv03067
Defendant:
MS. J. WALKER, MS. NOVAK, MS. NEKO BOURNE and others
Plaintiff:
MR. DAVID WILSON PEPE
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
BROWN v. NICHOLSON et al
as 2:2018cv03328
Plaintiff:
MALEEK BROWN
Defendant:
SUPERINTENDENT MARIROSA LAMAS, PHYSICIAN ASSISTANT JOHN NICHOLSON and RNC SHIRLEY LAW-SMITH
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
STOKES v. BOURNE et al
as 2:2017cv03669
Plaintiff:
WILLIE STOKES
Defendant:
NEKO BOURNE, MARIROSA LAMAS, MARK WAHL and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
MORALES v. CORRECT CARE SOLUTION et al
as 2:2017cv03254
Plaintiff:
JOSE VASQUEZ MORALES
Defendant:
CORRECT CARE SOLUTION, MARIROSA LAMAS and TOMLIN
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
TABANSI v. SCI FOREST J-BLOCK RHU ET AL et al
as 1:2015cv00261
Plaintiff:
SEHU KESSA SAA TABANSI
Defendant:
SCI FOREST J-BLOCK RHU ET AL, MICHAEL D. OVERMYER, JEFFREY HORTON and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
BARTELLI v. PENNSYLVANIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS et al
as 2:2013cv01148
Plaintiff:
KEITH BARTELLI
Defendant:
PENNSYLVANIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, LOUIS FOLINO and MARIROSA LAMAS
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr Prisoner Civil Rights
BOYER v. SCR ROCKVIEW ADMINISTRATION et al
as 2:2012cv04330
Plaintiff:
BRUCE G. BOYER
Defendant:
SCR ROCKVIEW ADMINISTRATION, MARIROSA LAMAS and FRANCIS DOUGHERTY
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.
