Cases 21 - 30 of 51
Steven Riley v. S. Kernan, et al
as 17-56298
Plaintiff - Appellant:
STEVEN ERICK RILEY
Defendant - Appellee:
S. KERNAN, Secretary of Corrections and Rehabilitations, W. L. MONTGOMERY, Acting Warden, Warden Calipatria State Prison, B. HEDRICK, Chief Deputy Warden and others
Steven Farlow v. Jeffrey Beard
as 16-56702
Petitioner - Appellant:
STEVEN FARLOW
Respondent - Appellee:
JEFFREY A. BEARD, Secretary of Corrections
Ruben Valdez v. Matthew Cate, et al
as 16-16948
Plaintiff - Appellant:
RUBEN VALDEZ
Defendant - Appellee:
MATTHEW CATE, Secretary of Corrections, California Department of Corrections, TIM V. VIRGA, Warden, L. JOHNSON-DOVEY, Associate Warden, CSP-Sacramento and others
Ruben Valdez v. Jeffrey Beard, et al
as 16-16765
Plaintiff - Appellant:
RUBEN VALDEZ
Defendant - Appellee:
JEFFREY BEARD, Secretary of Corrections, R. S. LAMBERT, Chief Deputy Warden, J. MAHONEY, Psy. D and others
Pedro Madrigal v. Matthew Cate
as 14-56115
Petitioner - Appellant:
PEDRO MADRIGAL
Respondent - Appellee:
MATTHEW CATES, Secretary of Corrections
Ben Fischetto v. Matthew Cate
as 13-55784
Petitioner - Appellant:
BEN FISCHETTO
Respondent - Appellee:
MATTHEW CATE, Secretary of Corrections
Carlos Pasos v. Matthew Cate, et al
as 12-17831
Plaintiff - Appellant:
CARLOS PASOS
Defendant - Appellee:
MATTHEW CATE, Secretary of Corrections, J. W. HAVILAND, Warden, V. SINGH, Associate Warden and others
Hakim Akbar-Jones v. M. McDonald, et al
as 12-17727
Plaintiff - Appellant:
HAKIM AKBAR-JONES
Defendant - Appellee:
M. MCDONALD, Warden, D. DAVEY, R. BARTON and others
Dwight Martin v. Matthew Cate
as 12-15647
Petitioner - Appellant:
DWIGHT MARTIN
Respondent - Appellee:
MATTHEW CATE, Secretary of Corrections and Rehabilitation
Stephen Ozaeta v. Matthew Cate
as 11-57217
Petitioner - Appellant:
STEPHEN G. OZAETA
Respondent - Appellee:
MATTHEW CATE, Secretary of Corrections
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.
