Cases 41 - 50 of 134
KATES v. CHRISTIE et al
as 2:2014cv05769
Plaintiff:
EDWARD KATES
Defendant:
NEW JERSEY GOVERNOR CHRIS CHRISTIE, JOHN J. HOFFMAN, JAMES T. PLOUSIS and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
WASHINGTON v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
as 2:2014cv04169
Petitioner:
LLOYD WASHINGTON, JR.
Respondent:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255
WILSON v. LANIGAN et al
as 2:2014cv03746
Defendant:
GARY M. LANIGAN, JAMES T. PLOUSIS, SAMUEL J. PLUMERI, JR. and others
Plaintiff:
KENNETH WILSON
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
DELUCA v. WHITE et al
as 2:2014cv00545
Petitioner:
RICHARD HENRY DELUCA
Respondent:
LLOYD A. WHITE, KRAIG WILLIAMS, MARK CAPOZZA and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
LLOYD v. NUTTER et al
as 2:2014cv01499
Plaintiff:
BRAHIN LLOYD
Defendant:
MICHAEL NUTTER, LOUIS GIORLA and JOHN DELANEY
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Victor Mitchell v. Laurel Harry
as 14-1064
Plaintiff - Appellant:
VICTOR LLOYD MITCHELL
Defendant - Appellee:
LAUREL HARRY
BROTHERS v. CORBETT et al
as 2:2013cv01154
Plaintiff:
WILLIAMS B. BROTHERS, JR.
Defendant:
TOM CORBETT, PENNSYLVANIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, PENNSYLVANIA BOARD OF PROBATION AND PAROLE and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr Prisoner Civil Rights
Demetrius Lloyd v. Bickell, et al
as 13-2625
Plaintiff - Appellant:
DEMETRIUS LLOYD
Defendant - Appellee:
BICKELL, DISTRICT ATTORNEY PHILADELPHIA and ATTORNEY GENERAL PENNSYLVANIA
ONLINE EXPRESS, INC. et al v. CARPEZZI LIEBERT GROUP [GLC] et al
as 2:2013cv01888
Plaintiff:
ONLINE EXPRESS, INC. and OSMAN N. OZSUSAMLAR
Defendant:
CARPEZZI LIEBERT GROUP "[CLG], TRI-STATE GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY, CAROLINA CASUALTY INSURANCE COMPANY and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Mitchell v. Harry
as 1:2013cv00120
Petitioner:
Victor Lloyd Mitchell
Respondent:
Laurel Harry
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
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.
