Cases 31 - 40 of 79
PAPURT v. ST. LUKE'S HOSPITAL AND HEALTH NETWORK et al
as 5:2015cv02523
Plaintiff:
ROCHELLE A. PAPURT
Defendant:
ST. LUKE'S HOSPITAL AND HEALTH NETWORK , NORTHAMPTON COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS , NORTHAMPTON COUNTY and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2015cv00105
Petitioner:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Respondent:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241
A.M. et al v. Mangal et al
as 3:2015cv00743
Plaintiff:
A.M. and Ashante Matos
Defendant:
Devanand Mangal, John Hagenbuckle, Aldin Dizdarevic and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2015cv00643
Petitioner:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Respondent:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241
MATOS v. TARGET et al
as 2:2014cv06174
Plaintiff:
KEVIN MATOS
Defendant:
TARGET, TARGET CORPORATION and TARGET STORES
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441
LOCADIA v. MATOS et al
as 5:2014cv05065
Plaintiff:
VICTOR MANUEL LOCADIA
Defendant:
ARNOLD M. MATOS, JAMES C. KOSTURA, TODD L. BUSKIRK and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Matos-Contreras v. PA State Attorney General et al
as 1:2014cv01661
Petitioner:
Gensi Matos-Contreras
Respondent:
PA State Attorney General, Attorney General of the United States at PA, Mary Sabol and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (IMMIGRATION)
MATOS v. PRISON HEALTH SERVICES INC. et al
as 2:2014cv04517
Plaintiff:
MICHAEL MATOS
Defendant:
PRISON HEALTH SERVICES INC. and MENTAL HEALTH MANAGEMENT INC.
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
BUTLER v. LAMONT et al
as 5:2014cv03733
Plaintiff:
JEFFREY BUTLER
Defendant:
CONRAD LAMONT, JOHN/JANE DOE GUARDS #1-X, JOHN/JANE DOE SUPERVISORS #1-X and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
SWIDERSKI v. NORTHAMPTON COUNTY PRISON et al
as 5:2014cv02116
Plaintiff:
JASON MARTIN SWIDERSKI
Defendant:
NORTHAMPTON COUNTY PRISON, ARNOLD MATOS, TODD BUSKIRK 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.
