Cases 51 - 60 of 641
FRYER v. PHILADELPHIA PRISON SYSTEM
as 2:2016cv02036
Plaintiff:
DEVON FRYER
Defendant:
PHILADELPHIA PRISON SYSTEM
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
BEATTY v. PHILADELPHIA PRISON SYSTEM
as 2:2016cv01525
Plaintiff:
JOSEPH BEATTY, JR.
Defendant:
PHILADELPHIA PRISON SYSTEM
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
WINN v. PHILADELPHIA PRISON SYSTEM et al
as 2:2016cv00284
Plaintiff:
JERMAINE WINN
Defendant:
PHILADELPHIA PRISON SYSTEM, JOHN E. WETZEL, CORRECTIONAL CARE SOLUTIONS and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
PEARSON v. PHILADELPHIA PRISON SYSTEM et al
as 2:2016cv00770
Plaintiff:
RODNEY PEARSON
Defendant:
PHILADELPHIA PRISON SYSTEM, CITY OF PHILADELPHIA, JIM KINNEY and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
JOHNSON v. PHILADELPHIA PRISON SYSTEM et al
as 2:2016cv00309
Petitioner:
CARLTON JOHNSON
Respondent:
PHILADELPHIA PRISON SYSTEM, LOUIS GIORLA, M. FARRELL and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241
PEARSON v. PHILADELPHIA PRISON SYSTEM
as 2:2016cv00240
Plaintiff:
RODNEY PEARSON
Defendant:
PHILADELPHIA PRISON SYSTEM, CITY OF PHILADELPHIA, MAYOR JIM KINNEY and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
TORRES v. PHILADELPHIA PRISON SYSTEM
as 2:2016cv00133
Plaintiff:
ISRAEL LUIS TORRES
Defendant:
PHILADELPHIA PRISON SYSTEM
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
GARVIN v. THE CITY OF PHILADELPHIA et al
as 2:2016cv00149
Plaintiff:
UMAR GARVIN
Defendant:
THE CITY OF PHILADELPHIA, PHILADELPHIA POLICE DISTRICT 19TH PRECINT, PHILADELPHIA PRISON SYSTEM and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
MARTIN v. BROOME et al
as 2:2016cv00030
Plaintiff:
RUSSELL MARTIN
Defendant:
BROOME, A. CRAWFORD, MIRANDA and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
MARTIN v. GREAVES et al
as 2:2016cv00028
Plaintiff:
RUSSELL MARTIN
Defendant:
GREAVES, WILLIAM LAWTON, LOUIS GIORLA and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
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.
