Cases 31 - 40 of 258
MAHALLI v. 3M COMPANY et al
as 8:2020cv02412
Defendant:
AEARO HOLDING LLC, AEARO INTERMEDIATE LLC, AEARO TECHNOLOGIES LLC and others
Plaintiff:
JACOB MAHALLI
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
PIZARRO v. WETZEL et al
as 3:2020cv00511
Defendant:
Officer John Doe, Lieutenant Reese, Lt. Eyer and others
Plaintiff:
SHANTA PIZARRO
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Shrum v. Stempien et al
as 3:2020cv00444
Defendant:
Cherri Stempien, Bernadette Mason, Francis Kirshner and others
Plaintiff:
Eric Shrum
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
POWELL v. MCKEOWN et al
as 1:2020cv00348
Defendant:
Mail Inspector Charles McKeown, Zachary J. Moslak, SUPERINTENDANT MR. Mahally and others
Plaintiff:
Raymond Gaston Powell, III
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Mark-Alonzo Williams v. John Wetzel, et al
as 20-1337
Defendant / Appellee:
MICHAEL MAHALLY, SUPERINTENDENT, SCI DALLAS, JOSEPH ZAKARAUSKAS, DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT, SCI DALLAS, JOHN WETZEL, SECRETARY PENNSYLVANIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS and others
Plaintiff / Appellant:
MARK-ALONZO WILLIAMS
PIZARRO v. WETZEL et al
as 5:2020cv00257
Defendant:
LT. EYER, JOHN DOE, LAWRENCE MAHALLY and others
Plaintiff:
SHANTA PIZARRO
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
POWELL v. MCKEOWN et al
as 2:2020cv00204
Defendant:
ZACHARY J. MOSLAK, SUPERINTENIDANT MR. MAHALLY, L.T. GARDZALLA and others
Plaintiff:
RAYMOND GASTON POWELL, III
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2020cv00076
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 451
Sabur v. Mahally
as 3:2019cv01693
Petitioner:
Bilal Sabur
Respondent:
Lawrence P. Mahally
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
ST. GEORGE v. MAHALLY et al
as 2:2019cv03963
Respondent:
THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA, MAHALLY and THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY OF COUNTY OF PHILADELPHIA
Petitioner:
PERCY ST. GEORGE
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
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.
