Cases 31 - 40 of 115
POLYTEK DEVELOPMENT CORP. v. 'DOC' JOHNSON ENTERPRISES
as 5:2019cv05943
Defendant:
'DOC' JOHNSON ENTERPRISES
Plaintiff:
POLYTEK DEVELOPMENT CORP.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
MACON v. SMOKLE et al
as 2:2021cv02929
Defendant:
ZULKOWIS, SGT. SWEENY, DOC ASSIAAST MCCOWN and others
Plaintiff:
JAMES MACON
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Kehoe v. PA DOC Director of Food Services at Central Office et al
as 3:2021cv00929
Defendant:
Rev. Rainey, Rev. Klemm, Mr. Stuller and others
Plaintiff:
John Kehoe
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441
MURRAY v. JONES et al
as 2:2021cv00152
Defendant:
FNU STRICKLAND, OTHER DOC EMPLOYEES WHOSE IDENTITIES ARE CURRENTLY NOT KNOWN, FNU WRIGHT and others
Plaintiff:
ABDUL MURRAY
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr
TREADWAY v. PA DOJ et al
as 2:2021cv00353
Plaintiff:
MR. PETER TREADWAY
Defendant:
JOSH SHAPROW, TOM WOLF, ALL LAWYERS OF GOVERNMENT OF PA and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr
Kingston v. Clark(c)TM et al
as 1:2021cv00031
Respondent:
Pharmatech Laboratory, C.O.1 Bullick, Fidel Clark(c)TM and others
Petitioner:
Roalston Stevenson Kingston
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
DIAZ v. OBERLANDER et al
as 1:2021cv00044
Defendant:
SUPERINTENDANT MICHAEL OVERMYER, PA. DOC. DEREK F. OBERLANDER, UNIT SGT. MAHONEY and others
Plaintiff:
ULYSSES S. DIAZ
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr
GIBSON v. SUPER. M. ADAMS, et al.
as 2:2020cv01419
Defendant:
PA DOC, MERCER SCI STATE CORRECTIONAL FACILITY SUPER ADAMS, SUPER. M. ADAMS and others
Plaintiff:
LEROY GIBSON
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr
KELLY v. PA DOC et al
as 2:2020cv04413
Defendant:
UNIT MANAGER CONNOR COUNCIL, MR. SHELBY, EASON and others
Plaintiff:
HAKEEM HARRIS and SHAHEED KELLY
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
KELLY v. PA DOC et al
as 3:2020cv00143
Defendant:
MS. QUINN, UNIT MANAGER CONNOR COUNCIL, MR. SHELBY and others
Plaintiff:
SHAHEED KELLY and HAKEEM HARRIS
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr
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.
