Cases 41 - 50 of 69
BOYER v. ROZUM et al
as 2:2012cv01532
Petitioner:
RICKY DEON BOYER
Respondent:
GERALD L. ROZUM and THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Desmond et al v. Phelps et al
as 1:2012cv01120
Plaintiff:
Abdul-Mafidh as Salafi, Christopher Desmond, Idris Young and others
Defendant:
Perry Phelps, David Pierce, James Scarborough and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
BOYER v. SCR ROCKVIEW ADMINISTRATION et al
as 2:2012cv04330
Plaintiff:
BRUCE G. BOYER
Defendant:
SCR ROCKVIEW ADMINISTRATION, MARIROSA LAMAS and FRANCIS DOUGHERTY
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Liddick v. Collins et al
as 1:2012cv01390
Plaintiff:
Wayne Earl Liddick
Defendant:
Robert Collins, Stanish, Sterling and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Cruz v. Southers et al
as 1:2012cv01392
Plaintiff:
Michael Dillon Cruz
Defendant:
Richard L. Southers, Paula M. Palmer, Marie T. Veon and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Dawn Ball v. Nancy Giroux, et al
as 12-2750
Plaintiff - Appellant:
DAWN MARIE BALL
Defendant - Appellee:
NANCY A. GIROUX, BOYER, SUEALLY and others
Dawn Ball v. Lamas, et al
as 12-2747
Plaintiff - Appellant:
DAWN MARIE BALL
Defendant - Appellee:
LAMAS, WRIGHT, NOONAN, C/O and others
Dawn Ball v. Famiglio, et al
as 12-2604
Plaintiff - Appellant:
DAWN MARIE BALL
Defendant - Appellee:
FAMIGLIO, DR., GLORIA DIGGAN, R.N., EGAN and others
Defendant - Numerous Parties See Appellee:
DILLELA, Nurse, VANESSA NICOLA, Hygenist, NELMS, Dentist and others
Ball v. Giroux et al
as 1:2012cv00813
Plaintiff:
Dawn Ball
Defendant:
Giroux, Boyer, Sueally and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Ball v. Hummel et al
as 1:2012cv00814
Plaintiff:
Dawn Ball
Defendant:
Hummel, Giroux, Troy Edwards and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
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.
