Cases 1 - 10 of 18
CIANCI v. ZAKEN et al
as 2:2023cv01738
Plaintiff:
ANTHONY MICHAEL CIANCI, III
Defendant:
M. ZAKEN, D. LEMASTER and KAPOLKA
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr Prisoner Civil Rights
ABEL v. BUZAS et al
as 2:2023cv01683
Plaintiff:
JOSHUA CAIN ABEL
Defendant:
BUZAS, KAPOLKA and D. LEMASTERS
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr Prisoner Civil Rights
ROGERS v. LEMASTER
as 1:2023cv00235
Petitioner:
Hrondy Tarvus Rogers
Respondent:
Warden David Lemaster and WARDEN, FCI MCKEAN
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Federal)
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
MAJORS v. LEMASTERS et al
as 2:2018cv01679
Defendant:
DAVID M LEMASTERS and JOHN DOE
Plaintiff:
CHRISTOPHER MAJORS
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr
LEMASTERS v. NORFOLK SOUTHERN RAILWAY CORPORATION et al
as 1:2016cv02186
Plaintiff:
William Lemasters, III
Defendant:
Norfolk Southern Railway Corporation and Renzenberger, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
LEMASTERS v. NORFOLK SOUTHERN RAILWAY CORPORATION et al
as 2:2016cv04797
Plaintiff:
WILLIAM LEMASTERS, III
Defendant:
NORFOLK SOUTHERN RAILWAY CORPORATION and RENZENBERGER, INC.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
LEMASTERS et al v. ETHICON WOMEN'S HEALTH & UROLOGY et al
as 2:2013cv07282
Plaintiff:
ANGELICA LEMASTERS and CHARLES LEMASTERS
Defendant:
ETHICON WOMEN'S HEALTH & UROLOGY , ETHICON, INC. , GYNECARE and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Murray v. Keen et al
as 4:2013cv00258
Plaintiff:
Shawn Christian Murray
Defendant:
Daniel S. Keen, Russell R. Rouzer, Michelle Weller and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Kelly Bey v. Keen et al
as 3:2012cv02209
Defendant:
Daniel S. Keen , Russell Rouzer , Michelle Weller and others
Plaintiff:
David F. Kelly Bey
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 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.
