Cases 1 - 10 of 57
BROOKS v. KLINEFELTER et al
as 2:2022cv04455
Petitioner:
JEREL S. BROOKS
Respondent:
SCOTT KLINEFELTER, THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY OF THE COUNTY OF PHILADELPHIA and THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Garcia v. Brooks et al
as 3:2022cv00089
Plaintiff:
Osvaldo Jose Garcia
Defendant:
Radford S Brooks, J.D. Brooks, T.R. Yeagar and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
BROOKS v. WEXFORD HEALTH SOURCES, INC. et al
as 1:2021cv03109
Plaintiff:
MATTHEW S. BROOKS
Defendant:
WEXFORD HEALTH SOURCES, INC., WEXFORD OF INDIANA, LLC, JONES and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Brooks v. Bivens
as 1:2021cv02221
Petitioner:
Craig S. Brooks
Respondent:
Carlos D. Bivens, Warden and Maryland Attorney General
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Glover v. Howell et al
as 2:2020cv00845
Defendant:
Howell, S. Brooks and H Wickham
Plaintiff:
Lavonte Glover
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Morris v. Hammers et al
as 1:2018cv01148
Plaintiff:
Joseph A Morris
Defendant:
Justin Hammers, Bryan Baca, Jill B Freeman and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Brooks v. Bishop et al
as 8:2017cv03063
Plaintiff:
Craig S. Brooks
Defendant:
Frank B. Bishop, Jr., Jeff Nines, William S. Bohrer and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
McCloud v. Brooks et al
as 1:2015cv07438
Plaintiff:
Peter J. McCloud
Defendant:
Sheriff Kelley, S. Brooks, Shalabi and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Michael Hollins v. Greg Munks, et al
as 14-15448
Plaintiff - Appellant:
MICHAEL HOLLINS
Defendant - Appellee:
GREG MUNKS, A. OVALLE and S. BROOKS
Hollins v. Munks et al
as 4:2013cv06013
Plaintiff:
Michael Hollins
Defendant:
Greg Munks, A. Ovalle and S. Brooks
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
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.
