Cases 81 - 90 of 149
Rowann v. Coleman
as 11-3739
Plaintiff - Appellant:
GEORGE M. ROWANN
Defendant - Appellee:
BRIAN V. COLEMAN, (Warden), et al.
BROWN v. COLEMAN et al
as 2:2011cv01256
Petitioner:
CHARLES BROWN
Respondent:
BRIAN V. COLEMAN, THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY OF ALLEGHENY COUNTY and THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATES OF PENNSYLVANIA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
REESE v. COLEMAN et al
as 2:2011cv01155
Petitioner:
LOUIS REESE
Respondent:
BRIAN V. COLEMAN and THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATES OF PENNSYLVANIA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
COUDRIET v. VARDARO et al
as 1:2011cv00185
Plaintiff:
SHAWN RICHARD COUDRIET
Defendant:
ANTHONY J. VARDARO, BRIAN V. COLEMAN, GARY M. ALIZZEO and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr Prisoner Civil Rights
IVERSON v. BARNACLE et al
as 2:2011cv01108
Plaintiff:
DAVID IVERSON
Defendant:
JAMES C. BARNACLE, CINDY G. WATSON, BRIAN V. COLEMAN and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
MCCLAIN v. COLEMAN et al
as 2:2011cv01091
Plaintiff:
RALPH W. MCCLAIN, JR.
Defendant:
BRIAN V. COLEMAN, WALLACE LEGGETT, MARY ANNE KUSHNER and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Iverson v. Barnacle et al
as 3:2011cv01483
Plaintiff:
David Iverson
Defendant:
James C. Barnacle, Cindy G. Watson, Brian V. Coleman and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Daryl Cook v. DA Philadelphia, et al
as 11-2889
Plaintiff - Appellant:
DARYL COOK
Defendant - Appellee:
DA PHILADELPHIA, ATTY GEN PA and BRIAN V. COLEMAN
Mable v. Coleman et al
as 1:2011cv01313
Petitioner:
Dave Mable
Respondent:
Brian V. Coleman and The Attorney General of the State of Pennsylvania
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
ARMSTRONG v. COLEMAN et al
as 2:2011cv04354
Petitioner:
KAREEM ARMSTRONG
Respondent:
BRIAN V. COLEMAN, 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
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.
