Cases 1 - 10 of 11
COX v. PA. DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS et al
as 2:2023cv04814
Plaintiff:
JERMONT COX
Defendant:
PA. DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, S.C.I. PHOENIX ET AL. 1-100, DR. LAUREL R. HARRY ET AL. 1-100 and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
NORTON v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
as 2:2023cv03484
Plaintiff:
SARAH NORTON
Defendant:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255 Motion to Vacate / Correct Illegal Sentenc
Norton v. Bechtold
as 1:2022cv01299
Plaintiff:
Seth William Norton
Defendant:
William Bechtold
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Norton v. Commonwealth Of Pennsylvania
as 1:2022cv00653
Petitioner:
Seth William Norton
Respondent:
Commonwealth Of Pennsylvania and PA State Attorney General
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Norton v. Franklin County Jail et al
as 1:2022cv00418
Plaintiff:
Seth William Norton
Defendant:
Franklin County Jail and Primecare Medical Services
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
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
NORTON v. CARAWAY
as 1:2015cv01690
Petitioner:
Darnell Norton
Respondent:
Superintendent, USP-Lewisburg
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2015cv00310
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Norton v. United States et al
as 1:2014cv02374
Plaintiff:
Darnell Norton
Defendant:
United States, U. S. Bureau of Prisons Staff at Lewisburg SMU, REC Officer #1 (NU) and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
NORTON v. COLEMAN et al
as 2:2009cv01751
Petitioner:
MARK NORTON
Respondent:
BRIAN COLEMAN, THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY OF THE COUNTY OF PHILADELPHIA and THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
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.
