Cases 1 - 10 of 19
Philip Bonadonna v. Donna Zickefoose, et al
as 14-3262
Plaintiff - Appellant:
PHILIP ANTHONY BONADONNA
Defendant - Appellee:
DONNA ZICKEFOOSE, In her individual and official capacities, ABIGAIL LOPEZ-DE LASALLE, in her individual and official capacities and JOHN CHUNG, in his individual and official capacities
USA v. Philip Bonadonna
as 13-15147
Plaintiff - Appellee:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Defendant - Appellant:
PHILIP ANTHONY BONADONNA
BONADONNA v. ZICKEFOOSE et al
as 1:2012cv07339
Plaintiff:
PHILIP A. BONADONNA
Defendant:
DONNA ZICKEFOOSE, ABIGAIL LOPEZ DE LASALLE and JOHN CHUNG
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
BONADONNA v. ZICKEFOOSE
as 1:2012cv06258
Petitioner:
PHILIP A. BONADONNA
Respondent:
DONNA ZICKEFOOSE
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
Philip Bonadonna v. Zickefoose, et al
as 12-3350
Plaintiff - Appellant:
PHILIP ANTHONY BONADONNA
Defendant - Appellee:
ZICKEFOOSE and EDWARD REILLY, Commissioner U.S. Parole Commission
BONADONNA v. SAMUELS et al
as 1:2012cv02543
Petitioner:
PHILIP A. BONADONNA
Respondent:
CHARLES E. SAMUELS, JR , DIRECTOR OF DSCC and U.S. SENATOR O'LEARY
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241
USA v. Philip Bonadonna
as 12-10425
Plaintiff - Appellee:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Defendant - Appellant:
PHILIP ANTHONY BONADONNA
BONADONNA v. ZICKEFOOSE et al
as 1:2011cv06193
Petitioner:
PHILIP A. BONADONNA
Respondent:
DONNA ZICKEFOOSE and EDWARD REILLY
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241
Bonadonna v. USA, et al
as 11-2548
Plaintiff - Appellant:
PHILIP ANTHONY BONADONNA
Defendant - Appellee:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA and DONNA ZICKEFOOSE, WARDEN AT FORT DIX FEDERAL PRISON
BONADONNA v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA et al
as 1:2011cv03134
Plaintiff:
PHILIP ANTHONY BONADONNA
Defendant:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA and DONNA ZICKEFOOSE
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.
