Cases 1 - 10 of 23
Daniel Harper v. California State Prison Lancaster et al
as 2:2024cv01789
Plaintiff:
Daniel James Harper
Defendant:
California State Prison Lancaster and CSP Lancaster Mail Room
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Daniel James Harper v. CSP Lancaster et al
as 2:2024cv01748
Plaintiff:
Daniel James Harper
Defendant:
CSP Lancaster
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Daniel James Harper v. California State Prison Lancaster et al
as 2:2024cv01875
Plaintiff:
Daniel James Harper
Defendant:
California State Prison Lancaster, CSP Lancaster Appeals Coordinator and CSP Lancaster my room staff
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Daniel Harper v. Jennifer Heinisch
as 2:2021cv02121
Plaintiff:
Daniel James Harper
Defendant:
Jennifer Heinisch
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Daniel James Harper v. CDCR et al
as 2:2020cv10498
Defendant:
Windfeld and CDCR
Plaintiff:
Daniel James Harper
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Daniel Harper v. A. Martin
as 2:2020cv09796
Plaintiff:
Daniel Harper and Daniel James Harper
Defendant:
A. Martin
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
CURRENCE v. FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS et al
as 3:2020cv00121
Plaintiff:
KAREEM JAMAL CURRENCE
Defendant:
James Harper, KEITH STRAUB, GENE GRAPPERHAUS and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
CURRENCE v. FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS et al
as 1:2019cv00103
Plaintiff:
KAREEM JAMAL CURRENCE
Defendant:
JAMES HARPER, KEITH STRAUB, GENE GRAPPERHAUS and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
HARPER v. WINGARD et al
as 2:2017cv00929
Petitioner:
JASON JAMES HARPER
Respondent:
TREVOR WINGARD, JOSH SHAPIRO and DISTRICT ATTORNEY OF ALLEGHENY COUNTY
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
James Harper, Jr. v. Anne Carter
as 15-6877
Petitioner - Appellant:
JAMES HARPER, JR.
Respondent - Appellee:
ANNE MARY CARTER, Warden
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.
