Cases 1 - 10 of 18
GUILLE v. KUHN et al
as 3:2023cv02138
Plaintiff:
ADRIAN GUILLE
Defendant:
VICTORIA L. KUHN, JOHN FALVEY, BRUCE DAVIS and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1651 Petition for Writ of Mandamus
WASHINGTON v. ARAMARK CORP. et al
as 1:2023cv01305
Plaintiff:
JAMALL WASHINGTON
Defendant:
ARAMARK CORP., CORRECTIONAL OFFICER LANE, JOHN DOE and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
WASHINGTON v. LANE et al
as 1:2022cv07015
Plaintiff:
JAMALL WASHINGTON
Defendant:
C.O. LANE, SGT. YACOB and INMATE NAYLOR
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
LANE v. TOWNSHIP OF HAZLET et al
as 3:2021cv18211
Plaintiff:
JOSEPH LANE
Defendant:
TOWNSHIP OF HAZLET and JOHN DOES 1-10
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
BUSS v. FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS et al
as 1:2021cv07590
Defendant:
CASE MANAGER CRAMER, CARVAJAL, M.D., COUNSELOR BROWN and others
Plaintiff:
JOSHUA BUSS
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
PENDLETON v. JUSTUS et al
as 3:2017cv02695
Plaintiff:
RONALD PENDLETON
Defendant:
LESLIE ANN JUSTUS, BRIAN WHITE, CAITLIN SIDLEY and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
LANE v. SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY
as 2:2016cv07814
Petitioner:
COREY LANE
Respondent:
SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241
ALLAH v. CHRISTIE et al
as 3:2016cv01046
Plaintiff:
KUTAME ALLAH
Defendant:
CHRIS CHRISTIE, KIM GUADAGNO, JOHN HOFFMAN and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
LANE v. THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF NEW JERSEY et al
as 3:2015cv04108
Petitioner:
TRAVIS LANE
Respondent:
THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF NEW JERSEY and STEPHEN D'ILLO
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
LANE v. LANIGAN et al
as 2:2014cv05281
Plaintiff:
RICHARD F. LANE
Defendant:
GARY M. LANIGAN, JAMES T. PLOUSIS, SAMUEL J. PLUMERI, JR. 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.
