Cases 1 - 7 of 7
Lynn Van Tassel v. Thomas Piccione, et al
as 14-3571
Plaintiff - Appellant:
LYNN A. VAN TASSEL, an adult individual
Defendant - Appellee:
THOMAS M. PICCIONE, Judge of the Court of Common Pleas, Lawrence County, PA, in his official and individual capacities, JAMES R. JENDRYSKI, Chief Probation Officer, the Lawrence County Adult Probation and Parole Department, in his official and individual capacities, BRIAN COVERT, Warden of Lawrence County Jail, in his official and individual Capacities and others
Kevin Thomas v. Thomas Piccione, et al
as 14-2943
Plaintiff - Appellant:
KEVIN A. THOMAS
Defendant - Appellee:
THOMAS M. PICCIONE, JOHN W. HODGE, MICHAEL OCCHIBONE and others
VAN TASSEL v. PICCIONE et al
as 2:2013cv01672
Plaintiff:
LYNN A. VAN TASSEL
Defendant:
THOMAS M. PICCIONE , JAMES R. JENDRYSIK, BRIAN COVERT and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Lynn Van Tassel v. John Hodge, et al
as 13-3256
Plaintiff - Appellant:
LYNN A. VAN TASSEL
Defendant - Appellee:
HONORABLE JOHN W. HODGE, Judge, Lawrence County Court of Common Pleas, in his official and individual capacities, HONORABLE THOMAS M. PICCIONE, Judge Lawrence County Court of Common Pleas, in his official and individual capacities, LAWRENCE COUNTY DOMESTIC RELATIONS SECTIONS and others
THOMAS v. PICCIONE et al
as 2:2013cv00425
Plaintiff:
KEVIN A. THOMAS
Defendant:
THOMAS M. PICCIONE, JOHN W. HODGE, MICHAEL OCCHIBONE and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question: Civil Rights Violation
VAN TASSEL v. HODGE et al
as 2:2013cv00024
Plaintiff:
LYNN A. VAN TASSEL
Defendant:
JOHN W. HODGE , THOMAS M. PICCIONE , LAWRENCE COUNTY DOMESTIC RELATIONS SECTIONS and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2201 Constitutionality of State Statute(s)
VAN TASSEL v. PICCIONE et al
as 2:2011cv01516
Petitioner:
LYNN A. VAN TASSEL
Respondent:
HON. JUDGE THOMAS M. PICCIONE and THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATES OF PENNSYLVANIA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
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.
