Cases 31 - 40 of 84
RUSSELL WOOD v. CAMDEN COUNTY JAIL
as 1:2016cv06756
Plaintiff:
TISEANA RUSSELL WOOD
Defendant:
CAMDEN COUNTY JAIL
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
RUSSELL v. CAMDEN COUNTY CORRECTIONAL
as 1:2016cv06638
Plaintiff:
GARFIELD RUSSELL
Defendant:
CAMDEN COUNTY CORRECTIONAL
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
RUSSELL v. CAMDEN COUNTY CORRECTIONAL FACILITY
as 1:2016cv06206
Plaintiff:
WALTER EDWARD RUSSELL
Defendant:
CAMDEN COUNTY CORRECTIONAL FACILITY
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
RUSSELL v. CAMDEN COUNTY CORRECTIONAL FACILITY
as 1:2016cv05979
Plaintiff:
ANTHONY T. RUSSELL
Defendant:
CAMDEN COUNTY CORRECTIONAL FACILITY
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
TINSLEY v. OFFICE OF THE PUBLIC DEFENDER et al
as 2:2016cv04102
Petitioner:
RUSSELL TINSLEY
Respondent:
OFFICE OF THE PUBLIC DEFENDER, THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF NEW JERSEY and SHERRY YATES
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
TINSLEY v. YATES et al
as 2:2016cv04078
Petitioner:
RUSSELL TINSLEY
Respondent:
SHERRY YATES and THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF NEW JERSEY
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
CONNOLLY v. SWEENY et al
as 2:2016cv01574
Plaintiff:
SHAWN M. CONNOLLY
Defendant:
CINDY SWEENY, VELEZ, ENSO and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
VANWYK v. SALEM COUNTY CORRECTIONAL FACILITY et al
as 1:2016cv01240
Plaintiff:
RUSSELL ROBERT VANWYK
Defendant:
SALEM COUNTY CORRECTIONAL FACILITY, SALEM COUNTY, RAYMOND C. SKRADZINSKI and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
ALLAH v. CHRISTIE et al
as 3:2016cv01046
Plaintiff:
KUTAME ALLAH
Defendant:
CHRIS CHRISTIE, KIM GUADAGNO, JOHN HOFFMAN and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
GIEHL v. LANIGAN et al
as 3:2015cv07864
Plaintiff:
RICHARD B. GIEHL
Defendant:
GARY M. LANIGAN, BETTIE HARRIS, ADMINISTRATOR JOHN/JANE DOE and others
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.
