Cases 31 - 40 of 50
Tormu Prall v. Joseph Bocchini, Jr., et al
as 10-3714
Plaintiff - Appellant:
TORMU E. PRALL
Defendant - Appellee:
JOSEPH L. BOCCHINI, JR., ARTHUR R. SYPEK, JR., CHARLES ELLIS and others
PRALL v. BOCCHINI et al
as 3:2010cv01228
Plaintiff:
TORMU E. PRALL
Defendant:
JOSEPH L. BOCCHINI, JR., ARTHUR R. SYPEK, JR., CHARLES ELLIS and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
PRALL v. BOCCHINI et al
as 1:2010cv01228
Plaintiff:
TORMU E. PRALL
Defendant:
CHARLES ELLIS, PHYLLIS OLIVER, MICHELLE R. RICCI and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Prall v. City of Boston et al
as 1:2010cv10058
Plaintiff:
Tormu E. Prall
Defendant:
City of Boston, John Does 1-99, John Moe and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Prall v. Hartford Prosecutors et al
as 3:2009cv01047
Plaintiff:
Tormu E. Prall
Defendant:
Hartford Prosecutors, Superior Court Judge and Dept of Corrections
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
PRALL v. BUCKS COUNTY COURTHOUSE
as 3:2009cv03088
Petitioner:
TORMU E. PRALL
Respondent:
BUCKS COUNTY COURTHOUSE
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
Prall v. Cambridge District Court
as 1:2009cv10961
Plaintiff:
Tormu E. Prall
Defendant:
Cambridge District Court
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
PRALL v. EAST WINDSOR MUNICIPAL COURT
as 3:2009cv02603
Petitioner:
TORMU E. PRALL
Respondent:
EAST WINDSOR MUNICIPAL COURT
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1651 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus
PRALL v. BURLINGTON CITY MUNICIPAL COURT
as 1:2009cv02615
Petitioner:
TORMU E. PRALL
Respondent:
BURLINGTON CITY MUNICIPAL COURT
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
PRALL v. ASSIGNMENT JUDGE et al
as 3:2009cv02608
Defendant:
TORMU E. PRALL
Respondent:
ASSIGNMENT JUDGE
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1651 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus
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.
