Cases 21 - 30 of 47
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2016cv02224
Appellant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Appellee:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 0158
Hammonds v. PA Dept. of Corr. et al
as 4:2015cv01063
Plaintiff:
Richard Allen Hammonds
Defendant:
PA Dept. of Corr., John Wetzel, Shirley Moore Smeal and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Daub v. Colvin
as 3:2015cv01066
Plaintiff:
Richard Allen Daub
Defendant:
Carolyn W Colvin
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 402
LITTLE v. GLAXOSMITHKLINE LLC
as 2:2014cv06316
Plaintiff:
RICHARD ALLEN LITTLE
Defendant:
GLAXOSMITHKLINE LLC
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
HAMMONDS v. FOREMAN et al
as 2:2014cv00787
Plaintiff:
RICHARD ALLEN HAMMONDS
Defendant:
SAMUEL H. FOREMAN, WEBER, GALLAGHER, SIMPSON, STAPLETON, FIRES & NEWBY, LLP and INGRID LI
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Hammonds v. Pennsylvania Department of Corrections et al
as 4:2014cv00527
Plaintiff:
Richard Allen Hammonds
Defendant:
Pennsylvania Department of Corrections, John Wetzel, Shirley Moore Smeal and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
RATUSHNY v. BICKELL et al
as 5:2014cv01324
Petitioner:
RICHARD ALLEN RATUSHNY
Respondent:
TABB BICKELL, ATTORNEY GENERAL OF PENNSYLVANIA and DISTRICT ATTORNEY OF NORTHAMPTON COUNTY
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Hammonds v. The Religious Accomodaion Committee at Camp Hill et al
as 4:2013cv01470
Plaintiff:
Richard Allen Hammonds
Defendant:
The Religious Accomodaion Committee at Camp Hill, Frank Lewis, Stephen Buzas and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
IN RE: RICHARD ALLEN DIAMOND et al v. DIAMOND
as 2:2013mc00151
Appellant:
MICHAEL GOLDSTEIN
Appellee:
RICHARD ALLEN DIAMOND
Cause Of Action: Motion for Leave to Appeal
Hammonds v. Collins et al
as 3:2012cv00236
Plaintiff:
Richard Allen Hammonds
Defendant:
B. Collins, A Kavolchik, M. Lorady and others
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.
