Cases 31 - 40 of 1,183
Pittman v. USA
as 2:2023cv07207
Petitioner:
Alonzo Pittman
Respondent:
USA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255 Motion to Vacate
Pittman v. Miller
as 5:2023cv01086
Petitioner:
Jeremiah Christain Pittman
Respondent:
Warden Miller
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federal)
Pittman v. United States
as 3:2023cv02281
Petitioner:
Steven Pittman, Jr.
Respondent:
United States
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
PITTMAN v. RIVELLO et al
as 5:2023cv04675
Petitioner:
GABRIEL PITTMAN
Respondent:
J. RIVELLO, THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA and PENNSYLVANIA BOARD OF PROBATION AND PAROLE
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Pittman (PS) v. Markham
as 1:2023cv03064
Plaintiff:
Emanuel Pittman
Defendant:
Markham
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Randle v. Brown et al
as 3:2023cv02532
Plaintiff:
Kendrick Thurman Randle
Defendant:
Marian Brown, Malcolm Harden, City of Grand Prairie and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Pittman v. Commonwealth of Pennsylvania et al
as 1:2023cv01888
Plaintiff:
Gabriel Isham Pittman
Defendant:
Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, J. Rivello and B. Beish
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
JOSS v. PITTMAN et al
as 2:2023cv22351
Petitioner:
HORATIO JOSS
Respondent:
YOLANDA PITTMAN, JOHN TSOUKARIS and ALEJANDRO N. MAYORKAS
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
Pittman (PS) v. Cardenas et al
as 1:2023cv03030
Plaintiff:
Emanuel Pittman
Defendant:
Cardenas, Bryant and Roland
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Rich v. Baird et al
as 5:2023cv00883
Plaintiff:
JT Rich
Defendant:
Stephens County, Dexter Lawley, Cheyenne Underwood and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
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.
