Cases 1 - 10 of 14
CHAMBERS v. CITY OF PHILADELPHIA et al
as 2:2023cv00137
Plaintiff:
EBONY CHAMBERS and ROBERT TAYLOR
Defendant:
CITY OF PHILADELPHIA, BLANCHE CARNEY, MICHELLE FARRELL and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
OWENS v. CARNEY et al
as 2:2022cv00159
Petitioner:
STEPHEN OWENS
Respondent:
BLANCHE CARNEY, JOHN/JANE DOE #1, JOHN/JANE DOE #2 and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
OWENS v. CARNEY et al
as 2:2022cv00008
Plaintiff:
STEPHEN OWENS
Defendant:
BLANCHE CARNEY, PHILADELPHIA DEPARTMENT OF PRISONS COMMISSIONER, JOHN/JANE DOE #1 and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Travillion v. Pennsylvania Department of Corrections et al
as 1:2018cv02075
Plaintiff:
Jamar L. Travillion
Defendant:
John/Jane Doe #4, John/Jane Doe #1, Mr. FNU Cox and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Dixon v. Pennsylvania Department of Corrections et al
as 3:2017cv01827
Plaintiff:
Denise Dixon
Defendant:
Pennsylvania Department of Corrections, John E. Wetzel, Robert Smith and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
GIBBONS v. MONTGOMERTY COUNTY et al
as 2:2016cv01233
Plaintiff:
JOHN GIBBONS
Defendant:
MONTGOMERTY COUNTY, MONTGOMERY COUNTY CORRECTIONAL FACILITY, JULIO ALGARIN and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Parker v. Harry et al
as 3:2015cv02469
Plaintiff:
Jason Parker
Defendant:
Laurel Harry, John E. Wetzel, James Meintel and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
JACKSON v. FOLINO et al
as 2:2015cv00457
Plaintiff:
NATHANIEL JACKSON
Defendant:
LOUIS FOLINO, JOHN DOE # 1, JOHN DOE # 2 and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
JAY v. WETZEL et al
as 3:2015cv00002
Plaintiff:
JOSEPH JAY
Defendant:
JOHN E. WETZEL, KENNETH CAMERON, STEVEN R. GLUNT and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
ANGLE v. WOODSIDE et al
as 2:2014cv00880
Plaintiff:
BRYAN ANGLE, II
Defendant:
DIANNA WOODSIDE, JOHN/JANE DOE 1, JOHN/JANE DOE 2 and others
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.
