Cases 11 - 20 of 49
ROBINSON v. THE COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA et al
as 2:2020cv04529
Defendant:
OFFICER DAVE HENRY, MAYOR MICHAEL NUTTER, THE COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA and others
Plaintiff:
CARL ROBINSON
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Robinson v. Delbalso et al
as 1:2020cv01171
Defendant:
John Steinhart, Sgt. Torres, Correct Care Solutions and others
Plaintiff:
Carl Robinson
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Bilal Muhammad v. Richard Wiles, et al
as 20-50279
Defendant / Appellee:
DAVID STOUT, RICARDO SAMANIEGO, EL PASO COUNTY and others
Plaintiff / Appellant:
BILAL MUHAMMAD
Carl Robinson v. Superintendent Retreat SCI, et al
as 20-1228
Plaintiff / Appellant:
CARL ROBINSON
Defendant / Appellee:
ATTORNEY GENERAL PENNSYLVANIA, DISTRICT ATTORNEY PHILADELPHIA and SUPERINTENDENT RETREAT SCI
Muhammad v. Wiles et al
as 3:2019cv00367
Defendant:
John Doe 1-125, Joanne Bernal, Aramark Services Inc. and others
Plaintiff:
Bilal Muhammad
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Robinson v. C.R. Bard, Inc. et al
as 2:2019cv04406
Plaintiff:
Carl Robinson
Defendant:
Davol, Inc. and C.R. Bard, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
HAILEY v. MONTGOMERY COUNTY CORRECTIONAL FACILITY et al
as 2:2019cv02171
Defendant:
CAPT. BERGER, P/O CARL ROBINSON, KATHLEEN A. MCLAUGHLIN and others
Plaintiff:
ALVIN MAURICE HAILEY
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Carl Robinson v. Superintendent Retreat SCI, et al
as 19-1059
Plaintiff / Appellant:
CARL ROBINSON
Defendant / Appellee:
ATTORNEY GENERAL PENNSYLVANIA, DISTRICT ATTORNEY PHILADELPHIA and SUPERINTENDENT RETREAT SCI
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2019cv00019
Respondent:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Petitioner:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Robinson v. Dollar General Corporation et al
as 9:2018cv00780
Plaintiff:
Carl Robinson
Defendant:
Dollar General Corporation, Chenelle Austin, John Croft 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.
