Cases 41 - 50 of 167
WEIKEL v. MONTGOMERY COUNTY CORRECTIONAL FACILITY et al
as 2:2017cv05123
Plaintiff:
KYLE RAYMOND WEIKEL
Defendant:
MONTGOMERY COUNTY CORRECTIONAL FACILITY, JULIO M. ALGARIN, NANCY L. WIEMAN and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
BLACKWELL v. MONTGOMERY COUNTY CORRECTIONAL FACILITY et al
as 2:2017cv04882
Plaintiff:
ALEX JOHN BLACKWELL, JR.
Defendant:
MONTGOMERY COUNTY CORRECTIONAL FACILITY, JULIO M. ALGARIN, G. ANDREW SZEKELY and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
PARKER v. ARMEL et al
as 2:2017cv00894
Petitioner:
MARIO COURTLIN PARKER
Respondent:
ERIC ARMEL and THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
PARKER v. PA PAROLE BOARD et al
as 2:2017cv02837
Petitioner:
CHARLES PARKER
Respondent:
PA PAROLE BOARD, D.O.C., THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY OF THE COUNTY OF and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Parker v. Warden
as 3:2017cv00765
Petitioner:
John D. Parker
Respondent:
Warden
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241
PARKER v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
as 2:2017cv01513
Plaintiff:
DWAYNE PARKER
Defendant:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255
PARKER v. CASTELI et al
as 2:2016cv04148
Plaintiff:
JASON PARKER
Defendant:
CASTELI, BAKER, WILLIE GREENE and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
PARKER v. DELANNEY et al
as 2:2016cv03585
Petitioner:
JASON PARKER
Respondent:
DELANNEY, THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY OF THE COUNTY OF SETH WILLIAMS and THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF KATHLEEN KANE
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
PARKER v. PERSON et al
as 2:2016cv03552
Plaintiff:
JASON PARKER
Defendant:
JOHN PERSON and SUPREME COURT OF PENN.
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
PARKER v. DELANNEY et al
as 2:2016cv03553
Petitioner:
JASON PARKER
Respondent:
DELANNEY, THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY OF THE COUNTY OF SETH WILLIAMS and THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF KATHLEEN KANE
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
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.
