Cases 1 - 6 of 6
Robert Taylor v. District Attorney Philadelphia, et al
as 19-1542
Defendant / Appellee:
GERALD MAY, Currently Warden, DEFENDER ASSOCIATION OF PHILADELPHIA, UNNAMED AND UNKNOWN CITY OF PHLADELPHIA POLICE OFFICERS and others
Plaintiff / Appellant:
ROBERT TAYLOR
Defendant:
CHRIS ANGELO, Currently Public Defender, UNNAMED AND UNKNOWN CITY OF PHLADELPHIA POLICE OFFICERS, Currently Public Defender, PHILADELPHIA SHERIFFS OFFICE, Currently Public Defender and others
Robert Taylor v. District Attorney Philadelphia, et al
as 17-3507
Plaintiff - Appellant:
ROBERT TAYLOR
Defendant - Appellee:
DISTRICT ATTORNEY PHILADELPHIA, CRIMINAL JUSTICE CENTER, FRANK PALUMBO, Currently Official Judge and others
Robert Taylor v. District Attorney Philadelphia, et al
as 17-3507
Plaintiff / Appellant:
ROBERT TAYLOR
Defendant:
FRANK PALUMBO, Currently Official Judge, CITY OF PHILADELPHIA, CRIMINAL JUSTICE CENTER and others
Defendant / Appellee:
DEFENDER ASSOCIATION OF PHILADELPHIA and CHRIS ANGELO, Currently Public Defender
TAYLOR v. THE COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA et al
as 2:2017cv03368
Plaintiff:
ROBERT TAYLOR
Defendant:
THE COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA, THE COMMONWEALTH COURT, FRANK PALUMBO and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241
TAYLOR v. THE COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA DISTRICT ATTORNEYS OFFICE et al
as 2:2017cv03369
Plaintiff:
ROBERT TAYLOR
Defendant:
THE COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA DISTRICT ATTORNEYS OFFICE, THE COMMONWEALTH COURT PHILADELPHIA CRIMINAL JUSTICE CENTER (CJC), FRANK PALUMBO and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
GISSENDANNER v. NEIFIELD et al
as 2:2013cv03367
Petitioner:
GARY GISSENDANNER
Respondent:
M. NEIFIELD, CHRIS ANGELO, DISTRICT ATTORNEY OFFICE & ATTORNEYS and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federal)
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.
