Cases 11 - 20 of 26
KIRKLAND v. SCHOUPPE et al
as 2:2016cv01908
Plaintiff:
TAVON KIRKLAND
Defendant:
WILLIAM SCHOUPPE, CAROL STEELE-SMITH, THOMAS TRKULJA and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
KAROLSKI v. BEAVER COUNTY et al
as 2:2016cv00001
Plaintiff:
CLIFFORD JOSEPH KAROLSKI
Defendant:
BEAVER COUNTY , WILLIAM SCHOUPPE , CAROL STEELE-SMITH and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr Prisoner Civil Rights
FOUSE v. BEAVER COUNTY et al
as 2:2014cv00810
Plaintiff:
THOMAS FOUSE
Defendant:
BEAVER COUNTY , WILLIAM SCHOUPPE and MARIO MONAC
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
HURLEY v. SCHOUPPE et al
as 2:2012cv00557
Petitioner:
DANIEL RICHARD HURLEY
Respondent:
WILLIAM SCHOUPPE and THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
JACKSON v. SCHOUPPE et al
as 2:2012cv00298
Plaintiff:
RICHARD L. JACKSON
Defendant:
WILLIAM SCHOUPPE, MARIO MONAC and DANTE DECANINI
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
WEEKLEY v. SCHOUPPE et al
as 2:2011cv01625
Plaintiff:
MONROE WEEKLEY, III
Defendant:
WILLIAM SCHOUPPE, CAROL STEELE and JENNIFER MONZA
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
JONES v. BEAVER COUNTY JAIL et al
as 2:2011cv00816
Plaintiff:
JOSEPH JONES
Defendant:
BEAVER COUNTY JAIL, WILLIAM SCHOUPPE, CARDE STEELE-SMITH and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
BOYER v. BERTOCCHINI et al
as 2:2010cv00338
Plaintiff:
THOMAS E. BOYER
Defendant:
ROBERT BERTOCCHINI, WILLIAM SCHOUPPE, GENARO and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr Prisoner Civil Rights
SHEETZ et al v. SCHOUPPE
as 2:2009cv01158
Plaintiff:
ROBERT SHEETZ and JUSTIN FULMER
Defendant:
WILLIAM SCHOUPPE and DIETARY-PHYSICIAN
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr Prisoner Civil Rights
BROWN v. SCHOUPPE et al
as 2:2008cv00924
Plaintiff:
MITCHELL BROWN
Defendant:
WILLIAM SCHOUPPE, MONAL, SETELL and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr 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.
