Cases 1 - 10 of 54
THOMPSON v. GIROUX et al
as 1:2018cv00028
Plaintiff:
PERCY THOMPSON
Defendant:
NANCY GIROUX, DANIEL STROUP, MARK GRUCZA and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
LORD v. COLEMAN et al
as 1:2017cv00019
Plaintiff:
LYNDA LORD
Defendant:
TREVON W. COLEMAN, NANCY GIROUX, MICHAEL CLARK and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
SIERRA v. KANE et al
as 1:2017cv00001
Petitioner:
ANTONIO SIERRA
Respondent:
KATHLEEN KANE, NANCY GIROUX and JACK DANERI
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
BREELAND v. JONES et al
as 1:2016cv00095
Defendant:
JONES, NANCY GIROUX, MELINDA ADAMS and others
Plaintiff:
JOSEPH BREELAND
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
ADAMS v. GIROUX et al
as 1:2016cv00064
Petitioner:
TROY L. ADAMS
Respondent:
NANCY GIROUX and ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
HARRIS v. WILLIAMS et al
as 1:2016cv00038
Plaintiff:
JORGE HARRIS
Defendant:
KRIEG WILLIAMS, NANCY GIROUX, MELINDA L. ADAMS and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
TEJADA v. ERIE COUNTY COURT OF COMMON PLEAS, AT NO. CR-2407-2015, ET AL
as 1:2016cv00026
Petitioner:
RICKY TEJADA
Respondent:
ERIE COUNTY COURT OF COMMON PLEAS, AT NO. CR-2407-2015, ET AL, KATHLEEN KANE and NANCY GIROUX
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
PRICE v. GIROUX et al
as 2:2016cv00117
Petitioner:
WILLIAM PRICE
Respondent:
NANCY GIROUX, DISTRICT ATTORNEY OF FAYETTE COUNTY and THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
HELSEL v. GIROUX et al
as 3:2016cv00010
Petitioner:
DAVID A. HELSEL
Respondent:
NANCY GIROUX and ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
JACOBS v. GIROUX et al
as 2:2015cv01656
Petitioner:
ANDRE JACOBS
Respondent:
SUPERINTENDENT NANCY GIROUX and THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA
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.
