Cases 11 - 20 of 66
RUGH v. CAMERON et al
as 2:2013cv00175
Petitioner:
STEPHEN PATRICK RUGH
Respondent:
KENNETH R. CAMERON, JOHN J. PREBISH, JR., JOHN PECK, II and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
BROWN v. CAMERON
as 2:2012cv07060
Petitioner:
DWAYNE BROWN
Respondent:
KENNETH R. CAMERON
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
CULMER v. CAMERON et al
as 3:2012cv00237
Plaintiff:
DANIEL CULMER
Defendant:
KENNETH R. CAMERON, MR. KUSTENBAUGHDER, MR. YARNELL and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr Prisoner Civil Rights
HENDERSON v. CAMERON et al
as 2:2012cv05998
Petitioner:
WARREN HENDERSON
Respondent:
KENNETH R. CAMERON, THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA and THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY OF PHILADELPHIA COUNTY
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
WARE v. CAMERON
as 1:2012cv00193
Petitioner:
TYRELL P. WARE
Respondent:
KENNETH R. CAMERON
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
PEREZ-REYES v. CAMERON et al
as 5:2012cv04326
Petitioner:
RAUL A. PEREZ-REYES
Respondent:
KENNETH R. CAMERON, JOHN T. ADAMS, THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY OF THE COUNTY OF BERKS CO., PA. and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
WARE v. CAMERON et al
as 1:2012cv00149
Petitioner:
TYRELL P. WARE
Respondent:
KENNETH R. CAMERON, LINDA L. KELLY and RAQUEL TAYLOR
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
HENDERSON v. SUPERINTENDENT KENNETH R. CAMERON et al
as 3:2012cv00061
Petitioner:
WARREN HENDERSON
Respondent:
SUPERINTENDENT KENNETH R. CAMERON and ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
SMITH v. CAMERON et al
as 3:2012cv00054
Plaintiff:
ANTRON SMITH
Defendant:
KENNETH R. CAMERON , JAMIE M. BOYLES , JAMEY P. LUTHER and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
McCollum v. Cameron et al
as 1:2012cv00241
Petitioner:
Neal McCollum
Respondent:
Kenneth R. Cameron and PA Attorney General
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.
