Cases 71 - 77 of 77
JONES v. COLEMAN, et al
as 2:2008cv00752
Petitioner:
HENRY LEE JONES
Respondent:
BRIAN V. COLEMAN, THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY OF THE COUNTY OF MERCER and THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
C. L. et al v. The Board of Education of the County of Mercer, Mercer County, West Virginia et al
as 1:2008cv00277
Plaintiff:
C. L., C. L., K. L. and others
Defendant:
The Board of Education of the County of Mercer, Mercer County, West Virginia, Deborah S. Akers and Does 1 through 50
Cause Of Action: Federal Question
STATE NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY, INC. v. COUNTY OF MERCER et al
as 3:2008cv00243
Plaintiff:
STATE NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY, INC.
Defendant:
COUNTY OF MERCER, MERCER COUNTY SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT, MERCER COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2201 Declaratory Judgement (Insurance)
GRANDE v. BROOKS et al
as 2:2007cv01317
Petitioner:
LEON R. GRANDE
Respondent:
MARILYN BROOKS, THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY OF THE COUNTY OF MERCER, PA and THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
FULLER v. SHANNON
as 2:2007cv00989
Petitioner:
ROBERT LYNN FULLER
Respondent:
ROBERT SHANNON, THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY OF THE COUNTY OF MERCER and THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
BARLOW v. STATE OF NEW JERSEY et al
as 3:2007cv02846
Plaintiff:
ROBERT F. BARLOW
Defendant:
STATE OF NEW JERSEY, COUNTY OF MERCER, N.J. STATE PAROL BOARD and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Potter v. Paitsel
as 1:2007cv00313
Plaintiff:
Danny Lee Potter
Defendant:
Craig Paitsel, R. C. Casey Martin, Princeton Police Department and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
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.
