Cases 1 - 10 of 48
SPURILL v. TRITT et al
as 2:2017cv00201
Petitioner:
LAMAR TYREE SPURILL
Respondent:
BRENDA TRITT, R. SETH WILLIAMS and KATHLEEN G. KANE
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Spurill v. Tritt et al
as 1:2017cv00048
Petitioner:
Lamar Tyree Spurill
Respondent:
Brenda Tritt, R. Seth Williams and Kathleen G. Kane
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
BOYD v. CLARK et al
as 1:2016cv00264
Petitioner:
ALONZO R. BOYD
Respondent:
MICHAEL CLARK, ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA - KATHLEEN G. KANE and PENNSYLVANIA BOARD OF PROBATION AND PAROLE
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
BETHEA v. MOONEY et al
as 2:2016cv00807
Petitioner:
TERRENCE BETHEA
Respondent:
VINCENT MOONEY, THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY OF THE COUNTY OF and THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF KATHLEEN G. KANE
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
ELLISON v. GARMAN et al
as 2:2016cv00775
Petitioner:
LAMONT ELLISON
Respondent:
MARK GARMAN, SETH WILLIAMS and KATHLEEN G. KANE
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
CARTER v. WARDEN AT SCI FRACKVILLE et al
as 1:2016cv00034
Plaintiff:
HOWARD A. CARTER
Defendant:
WARDEN AT SCI FRACKVILLE and KATHLEEN G. KANE
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
CARTER v. KANE et al
as 1:2016cv00033
Plaintiff:
HOWARD A. CARTER
Defendant:
KATHLEEN G. KANE, ROBERT E. COLVILLE, STEPHEN A. ZAPPALLA, JR. and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
CARTER v. KANE et al
as 1:2016cv00035
Plaintiff:
HOWARD A. CARTER
Defendant:
KATHLEEN G. KANE, DANIEL P. BURNS, JAMES C. BARNACLE and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
CARTER v. KANE et al
as 1:2016cv00031
Plaintiff:
HOWARD A. CARTER
Defendant:
KATHLEEN G. KANE, SCI PITTSBURGH MEDICAL DEPARTMENT and EX WARDEN OF SCI PITTSBURGH
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
CARTER v. KANE et al
as 1:2016cv00036
Plaintiff:
HOWARD A. CARTER
Defendant:
KATHLEEN G. KANE, BRIAN V. COLEMAN, JAMES C. BARNACLE 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.
