Cases 31 - 40 of 121
SIMMONS v. SAUNDERS et al
as 2:2017cv04289
Plaintiff:
CLARENCE X. SIMMONS
Defendant:
SAUNDERS , GRATERFORD WARDEN , SHIFT COMMANDOR and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
SIMMONS v. WETZEL et al
as 2:2017cv03704
Petitioner:
AUGUSTUS SIMMONS
Respondent:
JOHN D. WETZEL, THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY OF THE COUNTY OF MONTGOMERY COUNTY and THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
SIMMONS v. GIMORE et al
as 2:2017cv00996
Plaintiff:
AUGUSTUS SIMMONS
Defendant:
R. GILMORE, M. ZAKEN, LEGGET and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
WYATT V WETZEL, ET AL
as 1:2017cv00181
Plaintiff:
ROY WYATT
Defendant:
JOHN WETZEL, OVERMYER, MRS BLAKES and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
SIMMONS v. WETZEL et al
as 2:2017cv00224
Plaintiff:
AUGUSTUS SIMMONS
Defendant:
JOHN WETZEL, SHIRLEY MOORE-SMEAL, ROBERT D. GILMORE and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Walker v. Ebbert et al
as 1:2016cv02387
Plaintiff:
Cedric Tyrone Walker
Defendant:
David J. Ebbert, Jason Seeba, C. Hughes and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
SIMMONS v. FALICESANO et al
as 2:2016cv05709
Plaintiff:
AUGUSTUS SIMMONS
Defendant:
FALICESANO, OTTINGER, COLLINS and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
SIMMONS v. U.S. ATTORNEY et al
as 2:2016cv05033
Plaintiff:
JAMAHL SIMMONS
Defendant:
U.S. ATTORNEY and USPIS OF PHILADELPHIA DIRECTOR/HEAD
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
SIMMONS v. GARMAN et al
as 2:2016cv04068
Petitioner:
JOHNNIE SIMMONS
Respondent:
GARMAN, THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY OF THE COUNTY OF PHILADELPHIA and THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
SIMMONS v. HIBBURT et al
as 2:2016cv04032
Plaintiff:
CHARLES ANTHONY SIMMONS, III
Defendant:
DANIELLE HIBBURT, DEBBIE DUNLAP, ROOT and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
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.
