Cases 71 - 80 of 87
COTTLE v. PARRY et al
as 1:2011cv00781
Plaintiff:
CHARLES COTTLE
Defendant:
KEVIN MICHAEL PARRY, JASON STETSER, ROBERT BAYARD and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
LOWBER v. PARRY et al
as 1:2011cv00327
Plaintiff:
JERMAINE LOWBER
Defendant:
KEVIN MICHAEL PARRY, JASON STETSER, ROBERT BAYARD and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
RUSSEL v. PARRY et al
as 1:2011cv00028
Plaintiff:
JERMAINE RUSSELL
Defendant:
KEVIN MICHAEL PARRY, JASON STETSER, ROBERT BAYARD and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
SHIELDS v. PARRY et al
as 1:2011cv00030
Plaintiff:
RAYMOND SHIELDS
Defendant:
KEVIN MICHAEL PARRY, JASON STETSER, ROBERT BAYARD and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
GRANT v. PARRY et al
as 1:2011cv00029
Plaintiff:
RASHFORD GRANT
Defendant:
KEVIN MICHAEL PARRY, JASON STETSER, ROBERT BAYARD and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
BUCKSHAW v. ATTORNEY GENERAL OF NEW JERSEY et al
as 1:2010mc00249
Plaintiff:
JOHN J. BUCKSHAW
Defendant:
ATTORNEY GENERAL OF NEW JERSEY, ATLANTIC CITY AND PRINCETON BOROUGH LAW DEPARTMENTS, UNIVERSITY OF PRINCETON- OFFICE OF GENERAL COUNSEL and others
CARSTARPHEN v. PARRY et al
as 1:2010cv06389
Plaintiff:
RHONDA CARSTARPHEN
Defendant:
KEVIN MICHAEL PARRY, JASON STETSER, ROBERT BAYARD and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
BLACKSON v. PARRY et al
as 1:2010cv06390
Plaintiff:
MUHAMMAD BLACKSON
Defendant:
KEVIN MICHAEL PARRY, JASON STETSER, ROBERT BAYARD and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
BUCKSHAW v. ATTORNEY GENERAL OF NEW JERSEY et al
as 1:2010mc00246
Plaintiff:
JOHN J BUCKSHAW
Defendant:
ATTORNEY GENERAL OF NEW JERSEY, ATLANTIC CITY MUNICIPAL COURT, PRINCETON BOROUGH and others
WATLEY v. PLOUSIS et al
as 2:2010cv05086
Petitioner:
LOUIS WATLEY
Respondent:
JAMES PLOUSIS, THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF NEW JERSEY, DONALD MEE and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
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.
