Cases 1 - 10 of 362
Cotton v. Shalk et al
as 1:2024cv00483
Plaintiff:
David Edward Cotton
Defendant:
Jennifer Shalk, Doe 1 and Doe 2
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights
RICKER v. SCI PINE GROVE et al
as 2:2024cv00273
Petitioner:
DAVID EDWARD RICKER
Respondent:
SUPERINTENDANT SCI PINE GROVE and PENNSYLVANIA BOARD OF PROBATION AND PAROLE
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Jackson, III v. Carter et al
as 2:2024cv00009
Plaintiff:
David Edward Jackson, III
Defendant:
Bernard A Carter, Angela McFerrin, Nadia Wardrip and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Jackson, III v. Warden
as 2:2024cv00010
Petitioner:
David Edward Jackson, III
Defendant:
Warden
Respondent:
Indiana Parole Board
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Niles v. Phillips et al
as 1:2024cv00007
Plaintiff:
David Edward Niles
Defendant:
Amber L. Phillips and John Doe
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
TYREE v. EASTWOOD et al
as 1:2023cv02303
Plaintiff:
SHANE TYREE
Defendant:
KENT EASTWOOD, CHRISTINA PACE, FRANK WOLFE, III and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 23-40611
Plaintiff / Appellant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant / Appellee:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 23-2019
Plaintiff / Appellee:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Appellant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant / Appellee:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 23-1996
Plaintiff / Appellee:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Appellant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant / Appellee:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Jose Montanez v. Paula Price, et al
as 23-2669
Plaintiff / Appellant:
JOSE MONTANEZ
Defendant / Appellee:
PAULA PRICE, Health Care Adminstrator SCI-Huntingdon, RAJINDER MAHLI, SCI-Huntingdon, GABRIELLE NALLEY, Physician's Assistant SCI-Huntingdon and others
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.
