Cases 1 - 10 of 21
ROYAL v. MACY'S CORPORATION et al
as 2:2021cv04439
Plaintiff:
HOZAY ROYAL
Defendant:
MACY'S CORPORATION and JAY NAKAHARA
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
ROYAL v. THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY OF MONTGOMERY COUNTY et al
as 2:2020cv02658
Respondent:
THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY OF MONTGOMERY COUNTY and THE COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA
Petitioner:
HOZAY ROYAL
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241
Hozay Royal v. Patrick Feliciano, et al
as 19-1992
Defendant / Appellee:
RUTHERFORD POLICE DEPARTMENT, OFFICER SEAN FARRELL, OFFICER THOMAS LEWIS and others
Plaintiff / Appellant:
HOZAY ROYAL
ROYAL v. THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF NEW JERSEY et al
as 2:2016cv06498
Petitioner:
HOZAY ROYAL
Respondent:
THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF NEW JERSEY and C. RAY HUGHES
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
ROYAL v. HADDON TOWNSHIP MUNICIPAL COURT
as 1:2012cv04900
Petitioner:
HOZAY ROYAL
Respondent:
HADDON TOWNSHIP MUNICIPAL COURT
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
ROYAL v. HADDON TOWNSHIP MUNICIPAL COURT
as 2:2012cv04900
Petitioner:
HOZAY ROYAL
Respondent:
HADDON TOWNSHIP MUNICIPAL COURT
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
ROYAL v. ANNECCHIARICO
as 2:2012cv01640
Plaintiff:
HOZAY ROYAL
Defendant:
ANTHONY ANNECCHIARICO
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
ROYAL v. ROCHFORD et al
as 2:2011cv07149
Plaintiff:
HOZAY ROYAL
Defendant:
EDWARD V. ROCHFORD, FRANK CORRENTE and NEIL COLLINS
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
ROYAL v. MORRIS COUNTY CORRECTIONAL FACILITY
as 2:2011cv05248
Plaintiff:
HOZAY ROYAL
Defendant:
MORRIS COUNTY CORRECTIONAL FACILITY
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
ROYAL v. COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA et al
as 2:2010cv07219
Petitioner:
HOZAY ROYAL
Respondent:
COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA, THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY OF THE COUNTY OF PHILADELPHIA and THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA
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.
