Cases 41 - 50 of 114
SCOTT v. D.O.C. et al
as 2:2014cv06946
Plaintiff:
DUWAN SCOTT
Defendant:
D.O.C. and THE PA. BOARD OF PROBATION AND PAROLE
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
DUPRIEST v. KERESTES et al
as 2:2014cv06718
Petitioner:
SAMUEL DUPRIEST
Respondent:
JOHN KERESTES, THE PA BOARD OF PROBATION AND PAROLE and THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
JONES v. PA. BOARD OF PROBATION AND PAROLE
as 2:2014cv01410
Petitioner:
JERRY JONES
Respondent:
PA. BOARD OF PROBATION AND PAROLE
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241
MOON v. WETZEL et al
as 1:2014cv00201
Respondent:
JOHN E. WETZEL, PA BOARD OF PROBATION AND PAROLE, DISTRICT ATTORNEY OF ERIE COUNTY and others
Petitioner:
JAMES D. MOON
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Schramm v. PA Board of Probation and Parole
as 3:2014cv01267
Plaintiff:
Tracy Schramm
Defendant:
PA Board of Probation and Parole
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Forrest v. Overmeyer et al
as 3:2014cv00934
Plaintiff:
Michael Forrest
Defendant:
Michael Overmeyer, Michael Tice, Lt. Murin and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Gerber v. Pennsylvania Department of Corrections et al
as 1:2014cv00674
Plaintiff:
Richard Gerber
Defendant:
Pennsylvania Department of Corrections, PA Board of Probation and Parole, William Campbell and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Boyer v. Tritt et al
as 3:2014cv00600
Petitioner:
Brian Boyer
Respondent:
Brenda Tritt, PA Board of Probation and Parole and PA State Attorney General
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2014cv01204
Petitioner:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Respondent:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1361
George v. PA Board of Probation and Parole
as 4:2014cv00025
Plaintiff:
Kasine George
Defendant:
PA Board of Probation and Parole
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
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.
