Cases 51 - 60 of 167
WILSON v. KANE et al
as 2:2015cv05375
Petitioner:
TODD A. WILSON
Respondent:
KATHLEEN KANE, ATTORNEY GENERAL OF PA and WARDEN SCI CAMP HILL
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
PRICE v. OVERMAYER et al
as 2:2015cv05352
Petitioner:
MARVIN PRICE
Respondent:
MICHAEL OVERMAYER, SUPERINTENDENT SCI FOREST, KATHLEEN KANE and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
PARKER v. TRITT et al
as 2:2015cv05167
Petitioner:
JASON PARKER
Respondent:
BRENDA TRITT, 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)
Wilson v. Kane et al
as 3:2015cv01789
Petitioner:
Todd A. Wilson
Respondent:
Kathleen Kane, Attorney General of PA and Warden SCI Camp Hill
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
BURTON v. WETZEL et al
as 2:2015cv05108
Petitioner:
CARL BURTON
Respondent:
JOHN WETZEL, ROBERT GILMORE and KATHLEEN KANE
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Burkhardt v. Kerestes et al
as 1:2015cv01738
Petitioner:
George W. Burkhardt
Respondent:
John Kerestes, Craig W. Stedman and Kathleen Kane
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Naill v. Director of the N.S.A. et al
as 1:2015cv01737
Plaintiff:
Billy Naill
Defendant:
Director of the N.S.A., Kathleen Kane, John Doe and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
FITZGERALD v. MAHALLY et al
as 2:2015cv01144
Petitioner:
ALLEN ONEIL FITZGERALD
Respondent:
LAWRENCE MAHALLY and KATHLEEN KANE
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
HOWARD v. GILMORE et al
as 2:2015cv04923
Petitioner:
MIKE HOWARD
Respondent:
ROBERT GILMORE, THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY OF THE COUNTY OF KATHLEEN KANE, THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF SETH WILLIAMS and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
CARTER v. MOONEY et al
as 2:2015cv04896
Petitioner:
AARON CARTER
Respondent:
VINCENT MOONEY, KATHLEEN KANE and SETH WILLIAMS
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
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.
