Cases 11 - 20 of 31
CURRY v. COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA et al
as 1:2018cv00278
Respondent:
THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA, COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA, THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY OF ERIE COUNTY and others
Petitioner:
JOHN SCOTT CURRY
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
CURRY v. BRITTAIN et al
as 5:2017cv04842
Petitioner:
HISHAMU CURRY
Respondent:
KATHY BRITTAIN, THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA and DISTRICT ATTORNEY OF LEHIGH COUNTY
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
ROBINSON v. SMITH et al
as 2:2017cv01023
Petitioner:
CURRY ROBINSON
Respondent:
BARRY SMITH, ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA and DISTRICT ATTORNEY OF PHILADELPHIA COUNTY
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
ROBINSON v. SMITH et al
as 3:2017cv00017
Petitioner:
CURRY ROBINSON
Respondent:
BARRY SMITH and ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
ROBINSON v. CAMERON et al
as 3:2016cv00044
Plaintiff:
CURRY ROBINSON
Defendant:
KENNETH CAMROM, JOHN E. WETZEL, VINCENT DEFELICE and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr Prisoner Civil Rights
CURRY v. CO. LANGLEY et al
as 3:2015cv00054
Plaintiff:
KENDALL CURRY
Defendant:
CO LANGLEY, PA MILLER, PA KAUFMAN and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
CURRY v. INDIANA COUNTY JAIL et al
as 2:2014cv01479
Plaintiff:
BRANDON CURRY
Defendant:
INDIANA COUNTY JAIL and ISIAH PAILLET
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr Prisoner Civil Rights
CURRY v. CARAWAY
as 1:2014cv00756
Petitioner:
Daniel J. Curry
Respondent:
Caraway
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241
MUNSON v. THE DETENTION CENTER CORECTIONAL FACILITY ON STATE ROAD et al
as 2:2014cv01398
Plaintiff:
PAUL MUNSON
Defendant:
THE DETENTION CENTER CORECTIONAL FACILITY ON STATE ROAD, CURRY, JACKSON and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
CURRY v. CITY OF PHILADELPHIA et al
as 2:2013cv05904
Plaintiff:
ROBRET CURRY
Defendant:
CITY OF PHILADELPHIA, MICHAEL NUTTER, LOUIS GIORLA and others
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.
