Cases 31 - 40 of 55
Joseph Watson v. City of Philadelphia, et al
as 12-3809
Plaintiff - Appellant:
JOSEPH WATSON
Defendant - Appellee:
CITY OF PHILADELPHIA, STANLEY CHMIELEWSKI, Deputy Prothonotary, RAYMOND D. ROBERTS and others
In re: Joseph Watson
as 12-3652
Petitioner:
In re: JOSEPH WATSON
Respondent:
SECRETARY PENNSYLVANIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, ATTORNEY GENERAL PENNSYLVANIA and DISTRICT ATTORNEY PHILADELPHIA
WATSON v. ROZUM et al
as 3:2012cv00035
Plaintiff:
JOSEPH WATSON
Defendant:
GERALD L. ROZUM, DANIEL J. GEHLMANN, JOSEPH DUPONT and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr Prisoner Civil Rights
Anderson et al v. Keystone RV Company et al
as 2:2012cv00114
Plaintiff:
Debra Anderson , Justina Anderson , Martha Anderson and others
Defendant:
Keystone RV Company, CH2M Hill Constructors, Inc., Bechtel International, Inc. and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Anderson et al v. Keystone RV Company et al
as 1:2011cv00496
Plaintiff:
Debra Anderson , All Plaintiffs , Justina Anderson and others
Defendant:
Keystone RV Company, Bechtel International, Inc., Fluor Enterprises, Inc. and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
WATSON v. WETZEL et al
as 3:2011cv00281
Plaintiff:
JOSEPH WATSON
Defendant:
JOHN E. WETZEL, DORINA VARNER, GERALD L. ROZUM and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
WATSON v. CITY OF PHILADELPHIA et al
as 2:2011cv07640
Plaintiff:
JOSEPH WATSON
Defendant:
CITY OF PHILADELPHIA, STANLEY CHMIELEWSKI, RAYMOND D. ROBERTS and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
In re: Joseph Watson, et al
as 11-4328
Plaintiff - Petitioner:
In re: JOSEPH WATSON
Defendant - Respondent:
SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, GERALD ROZUM, GIBSON and others
Not Party - Nominal Respondent:
KIM R GIBSON
Watson v. Goodwin et al
as 5:2011cv00603
Plaintiff:
Joseph Watson
Defendant:
Jerry Goodwin, Nail, Benson 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.
