Cases 21 - 30 of 40
ALFORD v. ELLIS et al
as 3:2015cv03484
Plaintiff:
CRAIG ALFORD
Defendant:
CHARLES ELLIS, MERCER COUNTY JAIL and RAYA-SCOTT
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
ALFORD v ULMER
as 3:2015cv02638
Plaintiff:
CRAIG ALFORD
Defendant:
EMT AGENT ULMER and NJ STATE PAROLE BOARD
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Craig Alford v. Laquise
as 14-3350
Plaintiff - Appellant:
CRAIG ALFORD
Defendant - Appellee:
LAQUISE, Hearing Examiner, DORINA VARNER, Chief Hearing Examiner, JOHN WETZEL and others
Craig Alford v. Pennsylvania Department of Cor
as 14-2944
Plaintiff - Appellant:
CRAIG ALFORD
Defendant - Appellee:
PENNSYLVANIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, ATTORNEY GENERAL PENNSYLVANIA and MARK STEVEN MATTHEWS
Alford v. Munley et al
as 1:2014cv00921
Plaintiff:
Craig Alford
Defendant:
James Munley, Thomas Blewitt and Karoline Mehalchick
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
In re: Craig Alford, et al
as 14-1505
Plaintiff - Petitioner:
In re: CRAIG ALFORD
Defendant - Respondent:
LAQUISE, Hearing Examiner, DORINA VARNER, SECRETARY JOHN WETZEL and others
In re: Craig Alford
as 14-1296
Petitioner:
In re: CRAIG ALFORD
Respondent:
SUPERINTENDENT MAHANOY SCI, PENNSYLVANIA BOARD OF PROBATION & PAROLE and ATTORNEY GENERAL PENNSYLVANIA
Pro Se Respondent:
WICKY CHOEUM and DAVID RICHARDSON
Nominal Respondent:
JAMES M. MUNLEY
In re: Craig Alford
as 14-1341
Petitioner:
In re: CRAIG ALFORD
Respondent:
SUPERINTENDENT MAHANOY SCI, PENNSYLVANIA BOARD OF PROBATION & PAROLE and ATTORNEY GENERAL PENNSYLVANIA
Pro Se Respondent:
WICKY CHOEUM and DAVID RICHARDSON
In re: Craig Alford
as 14-1295
Petitioner:
In re: CRAIG ALFORD
Respondent:
PENNSYLVANIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS and ATTORNEY GENERAL PENNSYLVANIA
:
MARK STEVEN MATTHEWS
Nominal Respondent:
JAMES M. MUNLEY
ALFORD v. CHRISTIE et al
as 2:2014cv01040
Plaintiff:
CRAIG ALFORD
Defendant:
CHRIS CHRISTIE, THOMAS R. CALCAGNI, JEFFREY KOZUR and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
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.
