Cases 41 - 50 of 3,854
SCOTT et al v. PENNSYLVANIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS et al
as 3:2023cv00315
Plaintiff:
EARNEST SCOTT, JR. and CHRISTOPHER JAMES ROBERTS
Defendant:
PENNSYLVANIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, LAUREL R. HARRY, JAMES C. BARNACLE and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr Prisoner Civil Rights
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2023cv02108
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 621 Job Discrimination (Age)
WASHITAW
as 2:2023cv05028
Not Yet Classified:
VANOKA JONES WASHITAW
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Jones v. Garza
as 1:2023cv02057
Petitioner:
Clyde Jones
Respondent:
Warden F. Garza
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
JONES v. SHIPIRO et al
as 2:2023cv04879
Plaintiff:
JOHN JONES, JR
Defendant:
JOSH SHIPIRO, DOES 1-100 INCLUSIVE, COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA, et al and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
HAWKINS v. OLIVER et al
as 1:2023cv00354
Plaintiff:
NICHOLE HAWKINS
Defendant:
SUPERINTENDENT OLIVER, SUPERINTENDENT OVERMYER, MS. SENZ and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr Prisoner Civil Rights
JONES v. CITY OF PHILADELPHIA
as 2:2023cv04861
Plaintiff:
CHRISTOPHER LOREN JONES
Defendant:
CITY OF PHILADELPHIA
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Jones v. Catell et al
as 1:2023cv01991
Plaintiff:
Marcellus A Jones
Defendant:
Catell, Karen Gordon, Patricia Comer and others
Debtor:
Crozier
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
JONES v. TRANS UNION, LLC et al
as 2:2023cv04728
Plaintiff:
JAMAAL JONES
Defendant:
TRANS UNION, LLC, EXPERIAN INFORMATION SOLUTIONS, INC, MERRICK BANK and others
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1681 Fair Credit Reporting Act
Rahman v. Jones, Jr. Esq
as 3:2023cv01962
Plaintiff:
Farida B. Rahman
Defendant:
Thomas Jones, Jr. Esq
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.
