Cases 11 - 20 of 226
SANCHEZ v. LUNDY
as 2:2023cv22947
Plaintiff:
DAVID SANCHEZ
Defendant:
DR. JAMES LUNDY
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
ROSARIO-SANCHEZ v. ESCOBAR-ESCOBAR
as 2:2023cv20740
Plaintiff:
ANGEL I ROSARIO-SANCHEZ
Defendant:
LUIS ADOLFO ESCOBAR-ESCOBAR
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
SANCHEZ v. SCOTT et al
as 2:2023cv12994
Plaintiff:
DAVID SANCHEZ
Defendant:
BECKY SCOTT, SERGEANT BROWN and OFFICER SALTAR
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
ROSARIO-SANCHEZ v. GRULLON
as 2:2023cv03960
Plaintiff:
ANGEL I ROSARIO-SANCHEZ
Defendant:
J. GRULLON
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
ROSARIO-SANCHEZ v. CORPORAL H. SOLIS et al
as 2:2023cv03687
Plaintiff:
ANGEL ROASARIO-SANCHEZ and ANGEL ROSARIO-SANCHEZ
Defendant:
CORPORAL H. SOLIS and DR. IBRAHIM
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
SANCHEZ-LEYVA v. KNIGHT
as 1:2023cv03606
Petitioner:
GERARDO ANTONIO SANCHEZ-LEYVA
Respondent:
STEVIE M. KNIGHT
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
Sanchez v. Barraza et al
as 1:2023cv01010
Petitioner:
Benny Manuel Sanchez
Respondent:
Warden Barraza and Bureau of Prisons
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
SANCHEZ v. WARDEN
as 1:2023cv02889
Petitioner:
DAVID O. SANCHEZ
Respondent:
WARDEN
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
RODRIGUEZ v. SANCHEZ et al
as 1:2023cv02750
Plaintiff:
ELIEZER RODRIGUEZ
Defendant:
CORRECTIONAL OFFICER SANCHEZ, CORRECTIONAL OFFICER MUNOZ, CORRECTIONAL OFFICER ACOSTA and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
ELIEZER v. CORDOVA et al
as 1:2023cv02714
Plaintiff:
RODRIGUEZ ELIEZER
Defendant:
GERVASIO CORDOVA, LUIS ACOSTA, ANTHONY GANGI and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question: Personal Injury
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.
