Wade Robertson v. Rise Pichon, et al
Petitioner - Appellant,: WADE ROBERTSON
Respondent - Appellee,: RISE JONES PICHON, Administrative Law Judge, Judge of Santa Clara Superior Court and ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
Case Number: 15-16463
Filed: July 22, 2015
Court: U.S. Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit
Nature of Suit: Habeas Corpus
Access additional case information on PACER

Access the Case Summary and Docket Report to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.

Search for this case: Wade Robertson v. Rise Pichon, et al
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Petitioner - appellant,: WADE ROBERTSON
Represented By: Marc Jonathan Zilversmit
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Respondent - appellee,: RISE JONES PICHON, Administrative Law Judge, Judge of Santa Clara Superior Court
Represented By: Jill M. Thayer
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Respondent - appellee,: ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
Represented By: Jill M. Thayer
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]

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.


Why Is My Information Online?