Cases 101 - 110 of 302
Craig Hairston v. Louis Folino, et al
as 12-3684
Plaintiff - Appellant:
CRAIG A. HAIRSTON
Defendant - Appellee:
LOUIS FOLINO and ATTORNEY GENERAL PENNSYLVANIA
MOATS v. FOLINO et al
as 2:2012cv01331
Petitioner:
BRIAN STEVEN MOATS
Respondent:
LOUIS FOLINO and THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
RAMTAHAL v. WETZEL et al
as 2:2012cv05154
Petitioner:
DAVID RAMTAHAL
Respondent:
JOHN E. WETZEL , LOUIS FOLINO and MARIROSA LAMAS
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
GERMAN v. FOLINO
as 5:2012cv05181
Petitioner:
ERIC GERMAN
Respondent:
LOUIS FOLINO
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
RIDGEWAY v. FOLINO et al
as 2:2012cv05092
Petitioner:
THEODORE RIDGEWAY
Respondent:
LOUIS FOLINO and THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
GORBY v. WETZEL et al
as 2:2012cv01170
Petitioner:
THOMAS J. GORBY
Respondent:
JOHN WETZEL, LOUIS FOLINO and DISTRICT ATTORNEY OF WASHINGTON COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Omar Edwards v. Louis Folino, et al
as 12-3211
Plaintiff - Appellant:
OMAR EDWARDS
Defendant - Appellee:
LOUIS FOLINO, DISTRICT ATTORNEY PHILADELPHIA and ATTORNEY GENERAL PENNSYLVANIA
PHILISTIN v. WETZEL et al
as 2:2012cv04460
Petitioner:
BORGELA PHILISTIN
Respondent:
JOHN E. WETZEL, LOUIS FOLINO and MARIROSA LAMAS
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Stephen Winters v. Louis Folino, et al
as 12-3111
Plaintiff - Appellant:
STEPHEN JOSEPH WINTERS
Defendant - Appellee:
LOUIS FOLINO, ATTORNEY GENERAL PENNSYLVANIA and DISTRICT ATTORNEY UNION COUNTY
SANTIAGO v. FOLINO et al
as 2:2012cv04065
Petitioner:
RAFAEL SANTIAGO
Respondent:
LOUIS FOLINO and THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA
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.
