Cases 41 - 50 of 155
B.L. v. Lamas et al
as 3:2015cv01327
Plaintiff:
B.L.
Defendant:
Marirosa Lamas , Steven Glunt , Tammy Ferguson and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
DiPietro v. The Department of Corrections and Its Employees Listed Herein et al
as 1:2015cv01137
Plaintiff:
Nicodemo DiPietro
Defendant:
The Department of Corrections and Its Employees Listed Herein, Daniel Mienert, John T. Wetzel and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
MURRAY v. GLUNT et al
as 2:2015cv03063
Petitioner:
TORRENCE WAYDE MURRAY
Respondent:
STEVEN GLUNT, THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY OF THE COUNTY OF SETH WILLIAMS and THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF KATHLEEN KANE
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
TRAVILLION v. GLUNT et al
as 2:2015cv00677
Petitioner:
JAMAR LASHAWN TRAVILLION
Respondent:
STEVEN GLUNT and STEPHEN A. ZAPPALA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Freeland v. PA State Attorney General et al
as 3:2015cv00965
Petitioner:
Keyon Freeland
Respondent:
PA State Attorney General and Steven Glunt
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
COULTER v. GLUNT et al
as 2:2015cv02785
Petitioner:
ANTONIO COULTER
Respondent:
STEVEN GLUNT, THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY OF THE COUNTY OF PHILADELPHIA and THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Hampton v. Wetzel et al
as 1:2015cv00897
Plaintiff:
Shawn Hampton
Defendant:
John E. Wetzel, Steven Glunt, Liptak and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Hampton v. Wetzel et al
as 1:2015cv00898
Plaintiff:
Shawn Hampton
Defendant:
John E. Wetzel, John/Jane Doe, Steven Glunt and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Patterson v. Wetzel et al
as 3:2015cv00882
Petitioner:
Maurice Patterson
Respondent:
John E. Wetzel, Robert Gilmore, Steven Glunt and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Morales v. Wetzel et al
as 1:2015cv00763
Petitioner:
Hector Morales
Respondent:
John E. Wetzel, Robert Gilmore and Steven Glunt
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.
