Cases 1 - 9 of 9
CUSTIS v. PENNSYLVANIA STATE PAROLE/PROBATION BOARD et al
as 2:2019cv03815
Defendant:
SGT BENNETT, JANE DOE, DETECTIVE UNIT and others
Plaintiff:
CHARMAINE CUSTIS
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2017cv02696
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000
PRATER v. DERRICOTTE et al
as 2:2014cv06186
Plaintiff:
CHARMAINE PRATER
Defendant:
GUYON DERRICOTTE, MICHAEL WHEELER, CITY OF PHILADELPHIA and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
WARNER v. MANGOLD et al
as 2:2014cv01503
Plaintiff:
LEVON T. WARNER
Defendant:
PATRICK MANGOLD, PITTS, CURRAN FROMHAND CORRECTIONAL FACILITY (MED. DEPT.) and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
PUGH v. THE CITY OF PHILADELPHIA et al
as 2:2013cv00813
Plaintiff:
RONALD S. PUGH
Defendant:
THE CITY OF PHILADELPHIA and THE CITY OF PHILADELPHIA POLICE DEPT.
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
MALLOY v. CITY OF PHILADELPHIA et al
as 2:2012cv05768
Plaintiff:
DAVID MALLOY
Defendant:
CITY OF PHILADELPHIA , CITY OF PHILADELPHIA POLICE DEPT., POLICE OFFICERS JOHN DOES 1-10 and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
ACEY v. CITY OF PHILADELPHIA - POLICE DEPT. et al
as 2:2012cv03563
Plaintiff:
DEMETRIUS ACEY
Defendant:
CITY OF PHILADELPHIA - POLICE DEPT. , ANGEL VAZQUEZ and JOHN DOE I-III
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
JONES v. CITY OF PHILADELPHIA POLICE DEPT. et al
as 2:2011cv06458
Plaintiff:
DONNELL L. JONES
Defendant:
CITY OF PHILADELPHIA POLICE DEPT. , PAUL DECARLO , ANDREW DUDZEK and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
SIMMONS v. CITY OF PHILADELPHIA POLICE DEPT. et al
as 2:2010cv05435
Plaintiff:
EZEKIEL SIMMONS
Defendant:
CITY OF PHILADELPHIA POLICE DEPT., DANIEL O'MALLY, JANE DOE 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.
