Cases 1 - 10 of 14
DENT v. PARISI et al
as 5:2023cv02675
Petitioner:
ROBERT WILSON DENT
Respondent:
THOMAS G. PARISI, ELLEN R. WEST, TIMOTHY J. MORRIS and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federal)
DENT v. IRWIN
as 1:2023cv00170
Petitioner:
RICHARD WILSON DENT and ROBERT WILSON DENT
Respondent:
RANDY IRWIN, ELLIOT L. SMEAL, DANIEL McCARTIN and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
DENT v. MORRIS et al
as 5:2022cv00756
Plaintiff:
ROBERT WILSON DENT
Defendant:
TIMOTHY J. MORRIS, DARREN SMITH, YISLEIDY D. MINAYA-VARGAS and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
POTTS v. MCFADDEN et al
as 2:2013cv05164
Plaintiff:
JIMMY POTTS
Defendant:
EDWARD MCFADDEN , RON PHILLIPS , WALTER REED and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Dent v. Kerestes et al
as 1:2013cv01395
Petitioner:
Robert Wilson Dent
Respondent:
John Kerestes, PA State Attorney General and District Attorney of Clinton County
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
HYNSON v. WILSON et al
as 2:2013cv00614
Plaintiff:
SHAMEK HASAN HYNSON
Defendant:
ROBERT WILSON, EDWARD MCFADDEN, MORGAN TAYLOR and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Dent v. Fritts et al
as 1:2013cv00078
Plaintiff:
Robert Wilson Dent
Defendant:
Marvin J. Fritts, Michael F. Salisbury and Lori A. Rexroth
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
WILSON v. COHEN
as 2:2012cv05526
Petitioner:
ROBERT WILSON
Respondent:
DENNIS P. COHEN
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
AGUIAR v. THOMPSON et al
as 2:2012cv05266
Plaintiff:
JASON J. AGUIAR
Defendant:
MICHAEL THOMPSON , BRETT WEAVER , JOHN DOE and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
WOOD v. WHITE et al
as 2:2012cv03860
Plaintiff:
WALTER M. WOOD, IV
Defendant:
CARROLE WHITE, MICHAEL GREENE, JOHN DOE and others
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.
