Cases 1 - 10 of 10
WILLIAMS v. PRATT et al
as 3:2020cv10269
Defendant:
SHEREEF M. ELNAHAL, C. WILLAIMS, JOHN DOE #1 and others
Plaintiff:
JONATHAN DONNELL WILLIAMS
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
RICHMOND v. SOUTHWOODS STATE PRISON et al
as 1:2020cv01079
Defendant:
MEDICAL STAFF OF SWSP, DOC OFFICERS and SOUTHWOODS STATE PRISON
Plaintiff:
DAVID RICHMOND
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
RICHMOND v. MEDICAL STAFF/DOC
as 3:2017cv02431
Plaintiff:
DAVID RICHMOND
Defendant:
MEDICAL STAFF/DOC
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
RICHMOND v. NJ PAROLE
as 3:2017cv02363
Plaintiff:
DAVID RICHMOND
Defendant:
NJ PAROLE
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
HILKEVICH v. KARPF, KARPF & CERUTTI, P.C. et al
as 2:2014cv00475
Plaintiff:
JOHN S. HILKEVICH
Defendant:
KARPF, KARPF & CERUTTI, P.C., JUSTIN L. SWIDLER, ESQ., ADAM C. VIRANT, ESQ. and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
RICHMOND v. SALEM COUNTY JAIL et al
as 1:2012cv05504
Plaintiff:
MELVIN RICHMOND
Defendant:
SALEM COUNTY JAIL and JOHN DOE
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
MURAKUSH CALIPHATES OF AMEXEM v. STATE OF NEW JERSEY et al
as 1:2011cv01317
Plaintiff:
MURAKUSH CALIPHATE OF AMEXEM INC.
Defendant:
STATE OF NEW JERSEY, SEVERAL UNKNOWN NJ STATE POLICE OFFICERS, BURLINGTON COUNTY and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
CHERRY v. WHITEHEAD et al
as 2:2009cv04161
Plaintiff:
CRYSTAL CHERRY
Defendant:
ERIC WHITEHEAD, JOHN AJEBE, FLORORANCE RICHMOND and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
MARRAKUSH SOCIETY v. SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY et al
as 1:2009cv03506
Plaintiff:
MARRAKUSH SOCIETY
Defendant:
SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY, BURLINGTON COUTNY VICINAGE, BURLINGTON COUNTY PROSECUTORS OFFICE and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Federal Question: Other Civil Rights
RICHMOND v. SULLIVAN
as 3:2007cv02415
Petitioner:
EUGENE RICHMOND
Respondent:
THOMAS P. SULLIVAN
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.
