Cases 1 - 7 of 7
MARTIN v. SECRETARY, PENNSYLVANIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS et al
as 2:2023cv02065
Petitioner:
JEFFREY ROBERT MARTIN
Respondent:
SECRETARY, PENNSYLVANIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, DISTRICT ATTORNEY OF GREENE COUNTY, ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 dp Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (DEATH PENALTY)
MARTIN v. WETZEL et al
as 2:2015cv01607
Petitioner:
JEFFREY ROBERT MARTIN
Respondent:
JOHN WETZEL, CYNTHIA LINK, MARJORIE FOX and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 dp Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (DEATH PENALTY)
Adams v. Brouse et al
as 3:2012cv01849
Plaintiff:
Jeffrey Robert Adams
Defendant:
Sgt. Brouse, Joe Moore, C.O. Greek and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
ALBRECHT et al v. A.C. AND S., INC. (ARMSTRONG CONTRACTING & SUPPLY) et al
as 2:2010cv64032
Plaintiff:
JEFFREY ROBERT HELGEMO
Defendant:
A.C. AND S., INC. (ARMSTRONG CONTRACTING & SUPPLY), A.P. GREEN INDUSTRIES, INC., A.P. GREEN SERVICES, INC. and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
HELGEMO v. AMCHEM PRODUCTS, INC. et al
as 2:2009cv85055
Plaintiff:
JEFFREY ROBERT HELGEMO and JEFFREY ROBERT HELGEMO
Defendant:
AMCHEM PRODUCTS, INC., AMERICAN OPTICAL CORPORATION, CERTAIN TEED CORPORATION and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Asbestos Litigation
AKER et al v. THE KEETON GROUP, LLC et al
as 3:2009cv00101
Plaintiff:
ROBERT C. AKER, JUDITH A. AKER, RONALD L. BEACHY and others
Defendant:
THE KEETON GROUP, LLC, STANDARD LAND COMPANY, INC., VIRGINIA ENERGY CONSULTING, LLC and others
Cause Of Action: Diversity
MAYNARD v. JOHNSON et al
as 2:2007cv00055
Petitioner:
JEFFREY ROBERT MAYNARD
Respondent:
J. BARRY JOHNSON, THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA and THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY OF THE COUNTY OF WESTMORELAND
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
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.
