Cases 1 - 8 of 8
Bahrampour v. Nelson, et al
as 23-4003
Plaintiff / Appellant:
AFSHIN BAHRAMPOUR
Defendant / Appellee:
RUSSELL NELSON, THE CHURCH OF JESUS CHRIST OF LATTER DAY SAINTS and SPENCER J. COX
Thompson-Jacobson v. Haddon et al
as 2:2021cv00093
Defendant:
Utah Board of Pardons & Parole, Jeremy Sharp, Tony Washington and others
Plaintiff:
Sean Glen Thompson-Jacobson
Not Classified By Court:
Correction Section (FYI) and Prisoner Litigation Unit
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Tiedemann v. Church of Jesus Christ, et al
as 15-4076
Plaintiff - Appellant:
EDGAR TIEDEMANN
Defendant - Appellee:
CHURCH OF JESUS CHRIST OF LATTER DAY SAINTS and THOMAS S. MONSON, Pres.
Tiedemann v. Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, The et al
as 2:2013cv00452
Plaintiff:
Edgar Tiedemann
Defendant:
Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, The and Thomas S. Monson
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Goodsell v. State of Utah et al
as 2:2010cv00367
Plaintiff:
Travis Wayne Goodsell
Defendant:
State of Utah, Lohra L. Miller, Howard Lemcke and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Ruston v. Church Of Jesus Christ Of, et al
as 08-4101
Plaintiff - Appellant:
LESTER JON RUSTON
Defendant - Appellee:
CHURCH OF JESUS CHRIST OF LATTER DAY SAINTS, GORDON B. HINCKLEY, VICTOR JAMES RUSTON and others
Ruston v. Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints et al
as 2:2007cv00929
Plaintiff:
Lester Jon Ruston
Defendant:
Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, Gordon B. Hinckley, Victor James Ruston and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Ruston v. Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints et al
as 2:2006cv00526
Plaintiff:
Lester Jon Ruston
Defendant:
Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, Gordon B. Hinckley and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question: Civil Rights Violation
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.
