Cases 31 - 40 of 59
In re: Christopher Hanson
as 11-1846
Petitioner:
In re: CHRISTOPHER HANSON
Respondent:
JAMES MCGRADY
LAWSON v. MCGRADY et al
as 2:2011cv01030
Petitioner:
JAMEEL LAWSON
Respondent:
JAMES MCGRADY, THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY OF THE COUNTY OF HUGH J. BURNS and THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF TOM CORBETT - PA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
ROSE v. MCGRADY et al
as 3:2011cv00253
Plaintiff:
Raymond P. Rose
Defendant:
James McGrady, Joseph Mataloni, John Chopkopak and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Heim v. Moore et al
as 3:2011cv00270
Plaintiff:
Joseph Heim
Defendant:
Shirley Moore, John Kelly and James McGrady
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Orlando Cruz v. James McGrady, et al
as 10-4775
Plaintiff - Appellant:
ORLANDO CRUZ
Defendant - Appellee:
JAMES MCGRADY, DA PHILADELPHIA and ATTY GEN PA
ROSE v. MCGRADY et al
as 2:2010cv07400
Plaintiff:
RAYMOND P. ROSE
Defendant:
JAMES MCGRADY, JOSEPH MATALONI, JOHN CHOPKOPAK and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
ANDERSON v. BEARD et al
as 2:2010cv05604
Plaintiff:
JOSH LEE ANDERSON
Defendant:
JEFFREY A. BEARD, JOSEPH J. PIAZZA, DAVID A. VARANO and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
KOWALEWSKI v. MCGRADY, et al
as 5:2010cv05467
Petitioner:
VINCENT JAMES KOWALEWSKI, III
Respondent:
JAMES MCGRADY, THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY OF THE COUNTY OF BERKS and THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
SHEELER v. MCGRADY et al
as 2:2010cv04185
Petitioner:
JOSHUA W. SHEELER
Respondent:
JAMES MCGRADY, THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY OF THE COUNTY OF MONTGOMERY and THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
v. MARTINEZ et al
as 2:2010cv01046
Defendant:
JUAN ALBERTO-SILVA MARTINEZ, JAMES MCGRADY and CENTRAL OFFICE STAFF IN CAMP HILL
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
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.
