Cases 31 - 40 of 121
BLAIR v. VOUGHT
as 3:2021cv00155
Petitioner:
BROCK ALLEN BLAIR
Respondent:
DENNIS VOUGHT and DISTRICT ATTORNEY OF SOMERSET COUNTY
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
KENYON v. MOFFIT et al
as 2:2021cv03663
Plaintiff:
TODD MICHAEL KENYON
Defendant:
CORRECTIONAL OFFICER MOFFIT, CORRECTIONAL OFFICER ZEKE, CORRECTIONAL OFFICER BOWDEN and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
SWEET v. MILES et al
as 2:2021cv02885
Plaintiff:
SHAYNE SWEET
Defendant:
SERGEANT MILES and C/O BLAIRE
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
ALLEN v. THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF BLAIR COUNTY
as 3:2021cv00103
Defendant:
THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF BLAIR CO.
Plaintiff:
THOMAS RAY ALLEN
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr
CAMPBELL v. BLAIR COUNTY COURT CLERKS
as 3:2021cv00094
Petitioner:
DWIGHT CAMPBELL
Respondent:
BLAIR COUNTY COURT CLERKS
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241
CLARK v. BLAIR COUNTY DISTRICT ATTORNEYS OFFICE et al
as 3:2020cv00169
Plaintiff:
WILLIS T. CLARK
Defendant:
BLAIR COUNTY DISTRICT ATTORNEYS OFFICE, RANDY FEATHERS and PETER J. WEEKS
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr
ADAMS v. ZAKEN et al
as 3:2020cv00166
Respondent:
ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA, MICHEAL ZAKEN and DISTRICT ATTORNEY OF THE COUNTY OF BLAIR
Petitioner:
DAVID JAMAL ADAMS
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
ROLAND v. BLAIR COUNTY PRISON et al
as 3:2020cv00144
Defendant:
OFFICER MARK GENSAMER, WARDEN ABBIE TATE and BLAIR COUNTY PRISON
Plaintiff:
JOSHUA W. ROLAND
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr
RIDGEWAY v. SMOCK et al
as 1:2020cv00200
Defendant:
JERI SMOCK, CHCA, MIKE EDWARDS, RNS, COI HALL and others
Plaintiff:
THEODORE RIDGEWAY
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr
SOWELL v. BLAIR COUNTY COURTHOUSE EMPLOYEES et al
as 3:2020cv00058
Defendant:
ALTOONA POLICE DEPARTMENT, HONORABLE BENJAMIN JONES, PETER WEEKS and others
Plaintiff:
MARKALE A. SOWELL
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr
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.
