Cases 41 - 50 of 75
SMART v. KELLY et al
as 1:2012cv07403
Plaintiff:
SALAHUDDIN SMART
Defendant:
K. KELLY, CAMDEN COUNTY DEPT OF CORRECTIONS and ERIC M. TAYLOR
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
ROBINSON v. N.J. DEPT OF CORRECTIONS et al
as 1:2012cv04532
Plaintiff:
TERRANCE ROBINSON
Defendant:
N.J. DEPT OF CORRECTIONS, GEORGE HYMAN, JOHN CORZINE and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
WENK v. LANIGAN et al
as 3:2012cv03143
Plaintiff:
MICHAEL CHRISTOPHER WENK
Defendant:
GARY M. LANIGAN, NEW JERSEY DEPT. OF CORRECTIONS, BARNES and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2012cv01261
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000
GONZALEZ v. CAPE MAY COUNTY et al
as 1:2012cv00517
Plaintiff:
LUIS A. GONZALEZ
Defendant:
CAPE MAY COUNTY, CAPE MAY COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE, COUNTY OF OCEAN and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2012cv00456
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
SMITH v. CRAF et al
as 1:2012cv00337
Plaintiff:
JAYDEE SMITH
Defendant:
CRAF and NJ DEPT OF CORRECTIONS
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
HOHSFIELD v. N.J. DEPT. OF CORRECTIONS et al
as 3:2012cv00241
Petitioner:
DAVID HOHSFIELD
Respondent:
N.J. DEPT. OF CORRECTIONS and MEG YATAURO
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
KELLY v. N.J. DEPT., OF CORRECTIONS et al
as 3:2011cv07256
Plaintiff:
HAKIM KELLY
Defendant:
N.J. DEPT., OF CORRECTIONS, GEORGE ROBINSON, COMMUNITY EDUCATION CENTER (C.E.C) and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
BROOKS v. STATE OF NEW JERSEY DEPT. OF CORRECTIONS et al
as 2:2011cv06805
Petitioner:
ANTHONY A. BROOKS
Respondent:
STATE OF NEW JERSEY DEPT. OF CORRECTIONS and PAULA T. DOW
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
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.
