Cases 31 - 40 of 484
Grant Bisel v. B. Birkholz et al
as 2:2022cv07266
Petitioner:
Grant Bisel
Respondent:
B. Birkholz and C. Peterson
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federal)
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 4:2022cv05394
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
(PC) Cassells v. County of Sacramento et al
as 2:2022cv01647
Plaintiff:
Anthony Cassells
Defendant:
County of Sacramento, Scott Jones and Grant Nugent
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Jerry Frye v. Ron Broomfield
as 22-99008
Petitioner:
JERRY GRANT FRYE
Respondent:
RON BROOMFIELD, Warden, San Quentin State Prison
Resendiz v. Maricopa, County of et al
as 2:2022cv00974
Plaintiff:
Robert Resendiz
Defendant:
Maricopa, County of, Jeffrey Alvarez, Richard Friedman and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441 Petition for Removal- Civil Rights Act
Johnny Warren v. Mark Napier, et al
as 22-15717
Plaintiff / Appellant:
JOHNNY LEE WARREN
Defendant / Appellee:
MARK NAPIER, Sheriff at Pima County Jail, LAURA CONOVER, County Attorney at Superior Court, DEBORAH BERNINI, named as Hon. Bernini, Div. 12, Judge at Superior Court and others
Grant
as 3:2022cv02433
Petitioner:
Vernon Grant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Donald Grant v. Jim Salmonsen, et al
as 22-35311
Petitioner / Appellant:
DONALD GRANT
Respondent / Appellee:
JIM SALMONSEN and ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR THE STATE OF MONTANA
Michael David Grant v. Danny Samuels
as 2:2022cv02595
Petitioner:
Michael David Grant
Respondent:
Danny Samuels
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Garnica-Melgoza v. Fortney et al
as 2:2022cv00392
Plaintiff:
Daniel Garnica-Melgoza
Defendant:
Adam Fortney, Evan Twept, Grant Kendall and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
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.
