Cases 81 - 90 of 396
Craig Alford v. Laquise
as 14-3350
Plaintiff - Appellant:
CRAIG ALFORD
Defendant - Appellee:
LAQUISE, Hearing Examiner, DORINA VARNER, Chief Hearing Examiner, JOHN WETZEL and others
Bray v. Kerestes et al
as 1:2014cv01395
Plaintiff:
John Bray
Defendant:
John Kerestes, Smith, Lightner and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Stuart v. Lisiak et al
as 1:2014cv01401
Plaintiff:
Lawrence Stuart
Defendant:
Lisiak, Tony Inuzzi, Karen Holly and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Carino v. Kerestes et al
as 1:2014cv01323
Petitioner:
Luis A. Carino
Respondent:
John Kerestes and PA State Attorney General
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Goodman v. Kerestes et al
as 1:2014cv01319
Petitioner:
Edward Goodman
Respondent:
John Kerestes, Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, Pennsylvania Board of Probation and Parole and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
JIMENEZ v. KERESTES et al
as 5:2014cv03995
Petitioner:
ROCKY JIMENEZ
Respondent:
JOHN KERESTES, THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY OF THE COUNTY OF LEHIGH and THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
PEW v. WETZEL et al
as 2:2014cv03868
Petitioner:
ALFONSO PERCY PEW
Respondent:
JOHN E. WETZEL, JOHN KERESTES, SHARON LUQUIS and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241
DIAZ v. KERESTES et al
as 2:2014cv03432
Petitioner:
CYPRIAH DIAZ
Respondent:
JOHN KERESTES, 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
SMITH v. KERESTES et al
as 2:2014cv00714
Petitioner:
CLINTON J. SMITH
Respondent:
JOHN KERESTES and THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Jamison v. Kerestes et al
as 1:2014cv01014
Petitioner:
Philmingo Jamison
Respondent:
John Kerestes and PA State Attorney General
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.
