Cases 1 - 10 of 11
Dwayne Stephenson v. Young, et al
as 18-35329
Plaintiff - Appellant:
DWAYNE ROBERT STEPHENSON
Defendant - Appellee:
YOUNG, Dr. and POULSON, N.P.
Dwayne Roberts v. Pennsylvania Department of Cor, et al
as 16-3630
Plaintiff - Appellant:
DWAYNE ROBERTS
Defendant - Appellee:
PENNSYLVANIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, ROCKVIEW SCI, ROCKVIEW MEDICAL DEPARTMENT, AN PRIVATIZED ENTITY, AND CONTRACTOR, EX AL, ETC. and others
Medeiros v. USA
as 1:2016cv00181
Respondent:
USA
Petitioner:
Dwayne Robert Medeiros
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255 Motion to Vacate / Correct Illegal Sentence
ROBERTS v. PA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS et al
as 1:2015cv02456
Plaintiff:
Dwayne Roberts
Defendant:
PA Department of Corrections, S.C.I. - ROCKVIEW PRISON and ACTING MEDICAL DEPARTMENT AT S.C.I. - ROCKVIEW
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Jose Manuel Lopez v. Dwayne Roberts et al
as 8:2015cv02087
Respondent:
Civil Department Administration, Does and Dwayne Roberts
Petitioner:
Jose Manuel Lopez
ROBERTS v. PA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS et al
as 2:2015cv06652
Plaintiff:
DWAYNE ROBERTS
Defendant:
PA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, S.C.I. - ROCKVIEW PRISON and ACTING MEDICAL DEPARTMENT AT S.C.I. - ROCKVIEW
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Stephenson v. Corizon Medical Services et al
as 1:2015cv00559
Plaintiff:
Dwayne Robert Stephenson
Defendant:
Corizon Medical Services, Young and Poulson
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Stephenson v. Corizon Medical Services et al
as 1:2014cv00460
Plaintiff:
Dwayne Robert Stephenson
Defendant:
Corizon Medical Services, Young and Poulson
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Dwayne Stephenson v. Randy Blade
as 14-35645
Petitioner - Appellant:
DWAYNE ROBERT STEPHENSON
Respondent - Appellee:
RANDY BLADES, Warden, Warden
Stephenson v. Blades
as 1:2013cv00382
Petitioner:
Dwayne Robert Stephenson
Respondent:
Randy Blades
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
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.
