Cases 21 - 28 of 28
In re: Cornelius Badger, Jr.
as 15-1617
Petitioner:
In re: CORNELIUS A. BADGER, JR.
Respondent:
QUINTON KENNEDY, ZIKIYYAH JACKSON, DONALD THOMAS and others
Nominal Respondent:
C. DARNELL JONES, II
In re: Gerald Bush
as 14-4040
Plaintiff - Petitioner:
In re: GERALD BUSH
Defendant - Respondent:
CRAIG B. SOKOLOW, Esquire, DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES, CITY OF PHILADELPHIA and others
Nominal Respondent:
C. DARNELL JONES, II
In re: Cornelius Badger, Jr.
as 14-3435
Petitioner - Petitioner:
In re: CORNELIUS A. BADGER, JR.
Defendant - Respondent:
STRYDEN INC, NOVOS ASSOCIATES LLC, MAJOR LOGISTICS LLC and others
Nominal Respondent:
C. DARNELL JONES, II
In re: Douglas Jackson, et al
as 12-2957
Plaintiff - Petitioner:
In re: DOUGLAS MARSHALL JACKSON and CEDRIC ARNEZ MCGEE, Of THE FAMILY "MAN", ETC.
Defendant - Respondent:
PNC BANK NA, (Formerly National City Bank), SYLVAN M. HOLZER, DBA President For, JAMES B. GRIFFIN, DBA Senior Counsel For and others
Not Party - Nominal Respondent:
C. DARNELL JONES, II
THOMAS v. JONES et al
as 2:2010cv02246
Plaintiff:
GREGORY THOMAS
Defendant:
C. DARNELL JONES, II, THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF PHILADELPHIA COUNTY, D. WEBSTER KEOGH and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
MCCAIN v. COURT OF COMMON PLEAS et al
as 2:2009cv04153
Plaintiff:
AMIR HAKIM MCCAIN
Defendant:
COURT OF COMMON PLEAS, C. DARNELL JONES, WEBSTER KEOGH and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
LYNCH v. THE CITY OF PHILA et al
as 2:2008cv04780
Plaintiff:
JOHN J. LYNCH
Defendant:
THE CITY OF PHILA, QUINN, MELODY and others
Cause Of Action: Federal Question
STRETTON et al v. JONES et al
as 2:2008cv01711
Plaintiff:
SAMUEL C. STRETTON, MINGO STROEBER, LEANNE LITWIN and others
Defendant:
C. DARNELL JONES, II, THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF PHILADELPHIA COUNTY, D. WEBSTER KEOGH and others
Cause Of Action: Federal Question
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.
