Cases 11 - 20 of 27
NIBLACK v. UNIVERSITY OF MEDICINE AND DENTISTRY OF NEW JERSEY et al
as 2:2014cv01831
Plaintiff:
STANLEY L. NIBLACK
Defendant:
UNIVERSITY OF MEDICINE AND DENTISTRY OF NEW JERSEY, UNIVERSITY CORRECTIONAL HEALTHCARE, JAMES R GONZALEZ, PRES./CEO and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
RAGLAND v. LANIGAN et al
as 1:2014cv00458
Plaintiff:
KIM RAGLAND
Defendant:
GARY M. LANIGAN, EVELYN DAVIS and QUINONES
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
ALPIZAR v. DAVIS et al
as 3:2013cv06916
Petitioner:
JOSE ALPIZAR
Respondent:
EVELYN DAVIS and THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF NEW JERSEY (JOHN HOFFMAN, ACTING)
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
FERGUSON v. DAVIS et al
as 3:2013cv05679
Petitioner:
TEON FERGUSON
Respondent:
EVELYN DAVIS, GARY LANIGAN and THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF NEW JERSEY
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
FRINK v. DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS et al
as 1:2013cv03479
Plaintiff:
JOHN O. FRINK
Defendant:
DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, CENTRAL RECEPTION ASSIGNMENT FACILITY, CAMDEN COUNTY JAIL and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
PACHECO v. DAVIS et al
as 3:2013cv00347
Plaintiff:
NORMAN PACHECO
Defendant:
EVELYN DAVIS and MID-STATE CORRECTIONAL FACILITY
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
SMITH v. DAVIS et al
as 1:2012cv02704
Plaintiff:
EARL SMITH
Defendant:
EVELYN DAVIS, BASS, K. MYERS and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
GLAZEWSKI v. DAVIS et al
as 1:2011cv07160
Plaintiff:
VINCENT W. GLAZEWSKI
Defendant:
EVELYN DAVIS, JOSEPH P. WYERS, LISA SCHOFIELD and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
STEVENS v. DAVIS
as 2:2011cv04094
Petitioner:
FLOYD STEVENS
Respondent:
EVELYN DAVIS and PAULA T DOW
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
STEVENS v. DAVIS
as 1:2011cv04094
Petitioner:
FLOYD STEVENS
Respondent:
EVELYN DAVIS
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
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.
