Cases 31 - 40 of 76
Prall v. Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts et al
as 1:2012cv10104
Plaintiff:
Tormu E. Prall
Defendant:
Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts, Office of The Bar Counsel, City of Boston Law Department and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
In Re: Tormu Prall, et al
as 12-1046
Petitioner:
TORMU E. PRALL
Respondent:
GARY M. LANIGAN and NEW JERSEY DEPARTMENT OF CORR
PRALL v. UNITED STATES CAPITOL POLICE
as 1:2011cv02269
Petitioner:
TORMU E. PRALL
Respondent:
UNITED STATES CAPITOL POLICE
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241
PRALL v. SUPREME COURT et al
as 3:2011cv07004
Plaintiff:
TORMU E. PRALL
Defendant:
SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, SUPERIOR COURT and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
PRALL v. SUPREME COURT et al
as 1:2011cv07004
Plaintiff:
TORMU E. PRALL
Defendant:
SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, SUPERIOR COURT and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
In re: Tormu Prall
as 11-4011
Plaintiff - Petitioner:
In re: TORMU E. PRALL
Defendant - Respondent:
JOSEPH L. BOCCHINI, JR., ARTHUR R. SYPEK, JR., CHARLES ELLIS and others
Not Party - Nominal Respondent:
JEROME B SIMANDLE
Tormu Prall v. Joseph Bocchini, Jr., et al
as 11-3956
Plaintiff - Appellant:
TORMU E. PRALL
Defendant - Appellee:
JOSEPH L. BOCCHINI, JR., ARTHUR R. SYPEK, JR., CHARLES ELLIS and others
PRALL v. N.J.D.O.C. et al
as 3:2011cv06355
Petitioner:
TORMU E. PRALL
Respondent:
N.J.D.O.C. and GARY M. LANIGAN
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241
Prall v. Cambridge District Court
as 11-2233
Petitioner - Appellant:
TORMU E. PRALL
Respondent - Appellee:
CAMBRIDGE DISTRICT COURT
Prall v. Hartford Prosecutors et al
as 11-4135
Plaintiff - Appellant:
Tormu E. Prall
Defendant:
Hartford Prosecutors, Superior Court Judge, Department of Corrections and others
Defendant - Appellee:
James E. Thomas, Cathryn Krinitsky and Stephen J. Miele
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.
