Cases 51 - 60 of 268
TATAR v. PA. DEPT. OF CORRECTIONS JEFFREY BEARD et al
as 2:2010cv01410
Petitioner:
JAMES ANTHONY TATAR
Respondent:
PA. DEPT. OF CORRECTIONS JEFFREY BEARD and THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Guzman v. Sabol et al
as 3:2010cv02178
Petitioner:
Avon Guzman
Respondent:
Mary Sabol, Jeffrey Beard and PA State Attorney General
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
SIMMONS v. CITY OF PHILADELPHIA POLICE DEPT. et al
as 2:2010cv05435
Plaintiff:
EZEKIEL SIMMONS
Defendant:
CITY OF PHILADELPHIA POLICE DEPT., DANIEL O'MALLY, JANE DOE and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
WASHINGTON v. BEARD et al
as 2:2010cv05371
Petitioner:
ANTHONY WASHINGTON
Respondent:
JEFFREY BEARD, MICHAEL WENEROWICZ, THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY OF THE COUNTY OF PHILADELPHIA and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Smith v. Beard et al
as 1:2010cv02046
Plaintiff:
Charles E. Smith, Jr.
Defendant:
Jeffrey Beard, Donald Kelchner, John A. Palakovich and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
GONZALEZ v. BEARD et al
as 5:2010cv04824
Petitioner:
JOSE GONZALEZ
Respondent:
JEFFREY BEARD, THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY OF THE COUNTY OF BERKS and THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Drawbaugh v. Beard et al
as 3:2010cv01929
Petitioner:
Michael Drawbaugh
Respondent:
Jeffrey Beard, Michael W. Curley and Attorney General of PA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
SYNO v. BEARD et al
as 1:2010cv00222
Plaintiff:
FRANK SYNO
Defendant:
JEFFREY BEARD, RAYMOND SOBINA, MICHAEL C. BARON and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
BARROS v. BEARD
as 2:2010cv04533
Petitioner:
CESAR XAVER BARROS
Respondent:
JEFFREY BEARD
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
RIVERA v. BEARD et al
as 5:2010cv04349
Petitioner:
CLETUS RIVERA
Respondent:
JEFFREY BEARD, LOUIS S. FOLINO and MARIROSA LAMAS
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 dp Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (DEATH PENALTY)
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.
