Cases 31 - 40 of 336
Stewart-Richardson v. Conelly et al
as 1:2022cv00742
Plaintiff:
Corey Stewart-Richardson
Defendant:
Lt. Conelly, C.O. Tucker Frey, C.O. Grim and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Tucker v. Wetzel, et al
as 1:2022cv00631
Plaintiff:
Hassan A. Tucker
Defendant:
John E Wetzel, George Little, Correctional Officer Kimberley and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Tucker v. Carvajal et al
as 3:2022cv00585
Plaintiff:
Ricardo Tucker
Defendant:
Michael Carvajal, Gene Beasley, Herman Quay and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Federal Question: Other Civil Rights
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2022cv01013
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1681 Fair Credit Reporting Act
TUCKER v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
as 2:2022cv00986
Plaintiff:
STEFAN TUCKER
Defendant:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255 Motion to Vacate / Correct Illegal Sentenc
BROOKS v. HARPER et al
as 2:2021cv01228
Plaintiff:
SAMUEL L. BROOKS
Defendant:
ORLANDO L. HARPER, LAURA K. WILLIAMS, DAVID ZETWO and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr
WILLIAMS-TUCKER v. SILVERSTEIN et al
as 2:2021cv02927
Defendant:
DEBRA SILVERSTEIN, JAKE ADAMS SILVERSTEIN, A'MIER SILVERSTEIN and others
Plaintiff:
FAHTIMA WILLIAMS-TUCKER
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1391
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2021cv00751
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Ginn v. Kauffman et al
as 1:2021cv00508
Respondent:
Pennsylvania Attorney General's Office, John Wetzel and Kevin Kauffman
Petitioner:
Tucker Ginn
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
TUCKER v. TRANS UNION, LLC et al
as 2:2021cv01215
Defendant:
TRANS UNION, LLC, EXPERIAN INFORMATION SOLUTIONS, INC. and IC SYSTEM, INC.
Plaintiff:
LEORA TUCKER
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1681
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.
