US District Court for the Eastern District of California Prisoner Petitions Cases
Cases 51 - 60 of 44,433
(PC) Bonilla v. Unknown
as 2:2024cv01167
Plaintiff:
Steven Wayne Bonilla, VEXATIOUS LITIGANT
Defendant:
Unknown
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
(PC) Kelly v. Bandaru et al
as 2:2024cv01161
Plaintiff:
James Carl Kelly
Defendant:
Bandaru, Akintola, Gina Jones and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
(HC) Rogers v. CDCR et al
as 2:2024cv01150
Petitioner:
John William Rogers
Respondent:
San Joaquin Superior Court and CDCR
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
(PC) Blackman v. Hill et al
as 2:2024cv01149
Plaintiff:
Tony Blackman
Defendant:
J. Hill, Jennifer Damies, S. D. Rutledge and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
(PC) Harper v. Williams et al
as 1:2024cv00460
Plaintiff:
Daniel Harper
Defendant:
Clayborne Williams and Jeff Lynch
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights (Employment Discrimination)
(PC) Webber v. Barrios et al
as 1:2024cv00461
Plaintiff:
Doyal Webber
Defendant:
J. Barrios, J. Ervin, P. Liamas and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
(PC) Harper v. Williams et al
as 2:2024cv01156
Plaintiff:
Daniel Harper
Defendant:
Clayborne Williams and Jeff Lynch
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
(PC) Harper v. Powell, et al.
as 1:2024cv00456
Plaintiff:
Daniel Harper
Defendant:
B Powell, S. Arana, J Grove and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
(HC) Madero v. The People
as 1:2024cv00445
Petitioner:
Eric Cruz Madero
Respondent:
The People
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
(HC) Flores v. The People
as 1:2024cv00444
Petitioner:
Joaquin Flores
Respondent:
The People
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.
