Cases 31 - 40 of 57
PETERSON v. WETZEL et al
as 2:2013cv07301
Petitioner:
GEORGE M. PETERSON
Respondent:
JOHN E. WETZEL, MICHAEL WENEROWICZ, THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY OF THE COUNTY OF PHILADELPHIA and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
PETERSON v. GLUNT et al
as 5:2013cv06395
Petitioner:
GEORGE PETERSON
Respondent:
STEVEN GLUNT and THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
BROTHERS v. CORBETT et al
as 2:2013cv01154
Plaintiff:
WILLIAMS B. BROTHERS, JR.
Defendant:
TOM CORBETT, PENNSYLVANIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, PENNSYLVANIA BOARD OF PROBATION AND PAROLE and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr Prisoner Civil Rights
PETERSON v. COLLINS et al
as 2:2013cv02054
Petitioner:
WARREN T. PETERSON
Respondent:
COLLINS and THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF _________
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Ball v. Powley et al
as 1:2011cv01832
Plaintiff:
Dawn Ball
Defendant:
Powley, Sisley, T. Peterson and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
PETERSON v. USA
as 2:2011cv01022
Respondent:
USA
Petitioner:
WILLIAM JAMES PETERSON
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255
Ball v. Hummel et al
as 1:2011cv01422
Plaintiff:
Dawn Ball
Defendant:
Lt. Hummel, Bucher, Dymmick and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Ball v. Sisley et al
as 1:2011cv00877
Plaintiff:
Dawn Ball
Defendant:
Sisley, Lt. Sauage, Robenolt and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
PETERSON v. GLUNT et al
as 3:2011cv00108
Plaintiff:
RAYMOND E. PETERSON
Defendant:
STEVEN R. GLUNT and COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA, BOARD OF PROBATION AND PAROLE
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
PETERSON v. GLUNT et al
as 2:2011cv00402
Petitioner:
RAYMOND EARL PETERSON
Respondent:
STEVEN GLUNT, THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA and JACK R. HENEKS
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.
