Cases 1 - 10 of 18
William Rohland v. Superintendent Huntingdon SCI, et al
as 21-2669
Plaintiff / Appellant:
WILLIAM ROHLAND
Defendant / Appellee:
SUPERINTENDENT PHOENIX SCI, ATTORNEY GENERAL PENNSYLVANIA and SUPERINTENDENT HUNTINGDON SCI
William Rohland v. Superintendent Huntingdon SCI, et al
as 21-2370
Plaintiff / Appellant:
WILLIAM ROHLAND
Defendant / Appellee:
SUPERINTENDENT HUNTINGDON SCI and ATTORNEY GENERAL PENNSYLVANIA
William Rohland v. County of Bucks
as 21-1894
Defendant:
COUNTY OF BUCKS
Plaintiff / Appellant:
WILLIAM ROHLAND
William Rohland v. County of Bucks, et al
as 20-2959
Defendant:
COUNTY OF BUCKS and 66 COUNTIES ET AL
Plaintiff / Appellant:
WILLIAM ROHLAND
Rohland v. Bucks County PA et al
as 3:2020cv00071
Defendant:
Bucks County PA and 66 Counties, et.al.
Plaintiff:
William Rohland
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
William Rohland v. Secretary Pennsylvania Departm, et al
as 19-1798
Defendant:
SUPERINTENDENT HUNTINGDON SCI, SECRETARY PENNSYLVANIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS and ATTORNEY GENERAL PENNSYLVANIA
Plaintiff / Appellant:
WILLIAM ROHLAND
Rohland v. Wetzel et al
as 1:2018cv00547
Petitioner:
William Rohland
Respondent:
John Wetzel, Kevin Kauffman and PA Attorney General
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
In Re: William Rohland
as 17-2940
Not Party - Petitioner:
In re: WILLIAM ROHLAND
Plaintiff - Respondent:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Defendant - Respondent:
FRANK J. CAPOZZI, ROBERT S. MONACO and KRISANDRA STRAUSSER CAPOZZI
Nominal Respondent:
JAMES M. MUNLEY
William Rohland v. Superintendent Huntingdon SCI, et al
as 17-2862
Plaintiff - Appellant:
WILLIAM ROHLAND
Defendant - Appellee:
SUPERINTENDENT HUNTINGDON SCI and ATTORNEY GENERAL PENNSYLVANIA
In re: William Rohland
as 17-2503
Not Party - Petitioner:
In re: WILLIAM ROHLAND
Plaintiff - Respondent:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Defendant - Respondent:
FRANK J. CAPOZZI, ROBERT S. MONACO and KRISANDRA STRAUSSER CAPOZZI
Nominal Respondent:
JAMES M. MUNLEY
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.
