Cases 1 - 10 of 276
Vanderpool et al v. Harry et al
as 1:2024cv00747
Plaintiff:
Roxie Vanderpool, Rickie Vanderpool, Allie Vanderpool and others
Defendant:
Laurel Harry, Gregory Davis, Peter Derieux and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
COIT v. CLOSE et al
as 3:2024cv00094
Plaintiff:
KEVIN COIT
Defendant:
SUPERINTENDENT CLOSE, PA DOC, SECRETARY LAUREL HARRY and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Cooper v. SCI-Muncy et al
as 3:2024cv00711
Plaintiff:
Kaitlyn Cooper
Defendant:
SCI-Muncy, Wendy Nickolas, C.O. Kurtz and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Stansbury v. Harry et al
as 1:2024cv00686
Plaintiff:
Kareem Stansbury
Defendant:
Laurel Harry, Michael Gourley, Zachary Molsak and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Holmes v. Harry et al
as 4:2024cv00655
Petitioner:
James Franklin Holmes
Respondent:
Laurel Harry and Pennsylvania Attorney General's Office
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
v. STOCKTON et al
as 2:2024cv00564
Defendant:
RONALD STOCKTON, LAUREL HARRY, RANDY IRWIN and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr Prisoner Civil Rights
STOCKTON v. HARRY et al
as 1:2024cv00112
Plaintiff:
RONALD STOCKTON
Defendant:
LAUREL HARRY, RANDY IRWIN, DEPUTY M-BLICHA and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr Prisoner Civil Rights
YOUNG v. HARRY et al
as 1:2024cv00081
Plaintiff:
BRYANT YOUNG
Defendant:
SECRETARY DR. LAUREL HARRY and SECRETARY GEORGE LITTLE
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr Prisoner Civil Rights
Brown v. PA Department of Corrections et al
as 1:2024cv00445
Plaintiff:
Kamil T. Brown
Defendant:
PA Department of Corrections, Laurel Harry, Kehoe and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
BUTLER v. HARRY et al
as 1:2024cv00079
Plaintiff:
JOHN BUTLER
Defendant:
LAUREL HARRY, SCOTT KLEINFELTER and MICHELLE IVICIC
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr Prisoner Civil Rights
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.
