Cases 21 - 30 of 217
PALOMO et al v. MURPHY et al
as 2:2023cv01036
Plaintiff:
MARIO PALOMO, MICHAEL CAMMARATA, JUAN C. CASTILLO-PONCE and others
Defendant:
GOVERNOR PHIL MURPHY, RUTGERS UNIVERSITY BEHAVIORAL HEALTH CARE - UNIVERSITY HEALTH CARE and JOHN DOE 1-5
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
RODRIGUEZ v. ATLANTIC COUNTY JAIL
as 1:2023cv00925
Plaintiff:
FREDDY RODRIGUEZ
Defendant:
ATLANTIC COUNTY JAIL
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
RODRIGUEZ-CHAVEZ v. WARDEN
as 1:2022cv07343
Petitioner:
JOSE RODRIGUEZ-CHAVEZ
Respondent:
WARDEN
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
RODRIGUEZ v. WARDEN, FCI FORT DIX
as 1:2022cv07280
Petitioner:
NELSON RODRIGUEZ
Respondent:
WARDEN, FCI FORT DIX
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
RODRIGUEZ v. KNIGHT
as 1:2022cv06360
Petitioner:
ANGELO RODRIGUEZ
Respondent:
WARDEN STEVIE KNIGHT
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
DEPACK v. DAY et al
as 2:2022cv06054
Plaintiff:
ROY DEPACK
Defendant:
MR. LARON DAY, MR. MARKO PESCE and MR. WILSON RODRIGUEZ
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Federal Question: Bivens Act
DOBY v. RODRIGUEZ et al
as 1:2022cv03011
Plaintiff:
DAVID DOBY
Defendant:
SGT. JOHN DOE #1, OFC. A. RODRIGUEZ, JANE DOE #1 and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
RODRIGUEZ v. TIRADO et al
as 1:2022cv01376
Plaintiff:
ANGEL L. RODRIGUEZ
Defendant:
OFFICER TIRADO and APRIL MUNSON
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
KING v. RODRIGUEZ et al
as 2:2022cv00353
Plaintiff:
SCOTT BARRY KING
Defendant:
DENISE RODRIGUEZ, ABIGAIL LOPEZ DE LASALLE and STEPHANY MCGANN
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
KING v. RODRIGUEZ et al
as 1:2022cv00353
Plaintiff:
SCOTT BARRY KING
Defendant:
DENISE RODRIGUEZ, ABIGAIL LOPEZ DE LASALLE and STEPHANY MCGANN
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
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.
