Cases 1 - 10 of 13
Kai Ingram v. Pennsylvania Board of Probation and Parole, et al
as 24-1532
Plaintiff:
KAI D. INGRAM
Defendant:
PENNSYLVANIA BOARD OF PROBATION AND PAROLE and SUPERINTENDENT GREENE SCI
Kai Ingram v. B. Rudzienski, et al
as 23-2145
Plaintiff / Appellant:
KAI D. INGRAM
Defendant / Appellee:
B. RUDZIENSKI, Greene Hearing Examiner
Kai IngramIn re: Kai Ingram
as 22-3216
Petitioner:
In re: KAI D. INGRAM
Respondent:
B. RUDZIENSKI, MICHAEL ZAKEN, S. DAVIS and others
INGRAM v. SCHWAB et al
as 2:2022cv01665
Plaintiff:
KAI D. INGRAM
Defendant:
COUNSELOR SCHWAB, SUPT. WILSON and JOHN/JOAN DOE
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr Prisoner Civil Rights
Kai Ingram v. Smithfield SCI, et al
as 22-1541
Plaintiff / Appellant:
KAI D. INGRAM
Defendant / Appellee:
SMITHFIELD SCI
INGRAM v. RUDZIENSKI et al
as 2:2022cv00042
Plaintiff:
KAI D. INGRAM
Defendant:
B. RUDZIENSKI, MICHAEL J. ZAKEN, S. DAVIS and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr Prisoner Civil Rights
INGRAM v. SCI SMITHFIELD, et al
as 2:2021cv00359
Defendant:
SCI SMITHFIELD UNIT MANAGER RUNK, DISTRICT DIRECTOR OF PAROLE KIRK C. LOOSI, C. GORMAN and others
Plaintiff:
KAI D. INGRAM
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr
In re: Kai Ingram
as 17-1058
Plaintiff - Petitioner:
In re: KAI D. INGRAM
Defendant - Respondent:
DEBRA SAUERS, JACQUELINE M. CARROLL, ATTORNEY GENERAL PENNSYLVANIA and others
Not Party - Nominal Respondent:
JOHN E JONES, III
Kai Ingram v. Superintendent Forest SCI, et al
as 17-1012
Plaintiff - Appellant:
KAI D. INGRAM
Defendant - Appellee:
SUPERINTENDENT FOREST SCI, ATTORNEY GENERAL PENNSYLVANIA and DISTRICT ATTORNEY LUZERNE COUNTY
In re: Kai Ingram
as 16-4188
Plaintiff - Petitioner:
In re: KAI D. INGRAM
Defendant - Respondent:
DEBRA SAUERS, ATTORNEY GENERAL PENNSYLVANIA and STEFANIE J. SALAVANTIS
Nominal Respondent:
JOHN E JONES, III
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.
