Cases 1 - 10 of 11
Patrick Okey v. Jonelle Eshbach, et al
as 26-1269
Plaintiff:
PATRICK OKEY
Defendant:
JONELLE H. ESHBACH, Solicitor County of York, YORK COUNTY PRISON, JOE JOHNSTON, Correctional Officer (Acting Warden) and others
Okey v. York County Solicitor's Office et al
as 1:2025cv01047
Plaintiff:
Patrick Okey
Defendant:
York County Solicitor's Office, Jonelle Harter, York County Domestic Relations and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Patrick Okey v. Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, et al
as 21-3061
Plaintiff / Appellant:
PATRICK OKEY
Defendant / Appellee:
COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA, ATTORNEY GENERAL PENNSYLVANIA and DISTRICT ATTORNEY YORK COUNTY
OKEY v. SCI HOUTZDALE, et al.
as 3:2018cv00018
Plaintiff:
PATRICK OKEY
Defendant:
SCI HOUTZDALE and MICHELLE IVICIC
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Okey v. SCI Houtzdale c/o Michelle Ivicic
as 1:2018cv00054
Plaintiff:
Patrick Okey
Defendant:
SCI Houtzdale c/o Michelle Ivicic
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Patrick Okey v. Daniel Strebig, et al
as 15-2205
Plaintiff - Appellant:
PATRICK OKEY
Defendant - Appellee:
DANIEL STREBIG and WARDEN DOLL
Patrick Okey v. Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, et al
as 14-4455
Plaintiff - Appellant:
PATRICK OKEY
Defendant - Appellee:
COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA, ATTORNEY GENERAL PENNSYLVANIA and DISTRICT ATTORNEY YORK COUNTY
Okey v. Strebig et al
as 1:2014cv01203
Plaintiff:
Patrick Okey
Defendant:
Daniel Strebig and Doll
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Okey v. Commonwealth of Pennyslvania et al
as 1:2014cv00616
Petitioner:
Patrick Okey
Respondent:
Commonwealth of Pennyslvania and PA Attorney General
Miscellaneous_party:
District Attorney of York County, Pennsylvania
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Patrick Okey v. Daniel Strebig, et al
as 13-2016
Plaintiff - Appellant:
PATRICK OKEY
Defendant - Appellee:
CPT DANIEL STREBIG, York County Prison and WARDEN DOLL
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.
