Cases 21 - 30 of 31
Matton v. Tucker et al
as 5:2012cv00281
Plaintiff:
Ronald Lee Matton
Defendant:
Ken Tucker, Steve Singer, Raymond Blye and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
James Freeman v. Craig Apker
as 12-15347
Petitioner - Appellee:
JAMES ANDREW FREEMAN
Respondent - Appellant:
CRAIG APKER
FREEMAN v. KERESTES et al
as 2:2012cv00155
Petitioner:
JAMES NICOLAS FREEMAN
Respondent:
JOHN W. KERESTES , THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY OF THE COUNTY OF ALLEGHENY and THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
James Freeman v. Department of Corrections, et al
as 11-1972
Plaintiff - Appellant:
JAMES NICHOLAS FREEMAN
Defendant - Appellee:
DEPT CORR
James Freeman v. Department of Corrections, et al
as 11-1727
Plaintiff - Appellant:
JAMES NICHOLAS FREEMAN
Defendant - Appellee:
DEPT CORR
Defendant - Numerous Parties See Appellee:
STUDLACK, ANN M. BATDORF, BOWERS, OFFICER and others
Freeman v. Apker
as 4:2011cv00130
Petitioner:
James Andrew Freeman
Respondent:
Craig Apker
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Federal)
James Freeman v. David Varano, et al
as 10-3314
Plaintiff - Appellant:
JAMES NICHOLAS FREEMAN
Defendant - Appellee:
DAVID VARANO, ATTY GEN PA and DA ALLEGHENY COUNTY
James Freeman v. David Varano, et al
as 10-2357
Plaintiff - Appellant:
JAMES NICHOLAS FREEMAN
Defendant - Appellee:
DAVID VARANO, ATTY GEN PA and DA ALLEGHENY
FREEMAN v. VARANO et al
as 2:2009cv01107
Petitioner:
JAMES NICHOLAS FREEMAN
Respondent:
DAVID VARANO, THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA and THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY OF THE COUNTY OF ALLEGHENY
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
James Freeman v. Dora Schriro, et al
as 08-16603
Petitioner - Appellant:
JAMES EDWARD FREEMAN
Respondent - Appellee:
DORA B. SCHRIRO and ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR THE STATE OF ARIZONA
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.
