Cases 61 - 70 of 237
JONES v. MURPHY et al
as 3:2018cv10189
Plaintiff:
RICCO N. JONES
Defendant:
MATTHEW MURPHY, MATTHEW KATZENBACH, ROBERT REED and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
CANGO v. BERGEN COUNTY JAIL ADMINISTRATOR et al
as 2:2018cv10151
Petitioner:
EUGENY CANGO
Defendant:
BERGEN COUNTY JAIL ADMINISTRATOR, BERGEN COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICERS, JOHN DOES 1-13 and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
SANDERS v. N.J. STATE PAROLE BOARD et al
as 3:2018cv05570
Plaintiff:
MICHAEL SANDERS
Defendant:
N.J. STATE PAROLE BOARD, COMBS, STEPHEN JONES and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
HARRIS v. NEW JERSEY PAROLE BOARD et al
as 3:2018cv03752
Plaintiff:
GOLDA HARRIS
Defendant:
NEW JERSEY PAROLE BOARD, NEW JERSEY DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, SARAH DAVIS and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
JONES v. NJ DOC CENTRAL TRANSPORTATION et al
as 3:2018cv01454
Plaintiff:
ANTONIO JONES
Defendant:
NJ DOC CENTRAL TRANSPORTATION, IHUOMA NWACHUKWU, M.D., JAMES K. LIU and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
JONES v. ATLANTIC COUNTY JUSTICE FACILITY
as 1:2017cv12889
Plaintiff:
CLEVELAND S. JONES
Defendant:
ATLANTIC COUNTY JUSTICE FACILITY
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
JONES v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
as 3:2017cv06777
Petitioner:
LEE JONES
Respondent:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255 Motion to Vacate / Correct Illegal Sentenc
JONES v. ORTIZ
as 1:2017cv06784
Petitioner:
RICKY LEE JONES
Respondent:
DAVID ORTIZ
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241
JONES v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
as 2:2017cv06463
Petitioner:
QUAWEE JONES
Respondent:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
JONES v. DOFFONT et al
as 2:2017cv03685
Plaintiff:
LASHAWN JONES
Defendant:
SAMANTHA DOFFONT and EAST JERSEY STATE PRISON
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.
