Cases 11 - 20 of 27
Torres v. Lambert et al
as 3:2017cv07137
Plaintiff:
Juan Matias Torres
Defendant:
B. Lambert, R. Kelly, L. Presley and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
McCurdy v. Rivero, et al
as 2:2017cv01449
Plaintiff:
James C McCurdy
Defendant:
M. Rivero, A. Devers, F. Alvarez and others
Respondent:
D. Leighton
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Mau v. Ducart et al
as 3:2017cv02548
Plaintiff:
Michael Dwayne Mau, Jr.
Defendant:
Clark E. Ducart, T. Lemos, D. Jacobsen and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Shaw v. Thomas et al
as 3:2017cv00462
Plaintiff:
Lewis Dominic Shaw
Defendant:
L. Thomas, B. Fellows, M. Hansen and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Albanez v. Jacobsen et al
as 3:2016cv00424
Plaintiff:
Henry Albanez
Defendant:
D. Jacobsen, S. Risenhoover, A. Dorfman and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Torres v. Sayre et al
as 4:2014cv05136
Plaintiff:
Freddie Moreno Torres
Defendant:
Michael C. Sayre, D. Jacobsen, Nnenna Ikegbu and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Gornick v. PBSP-Medical/CDCR et al
as 4:2014cv03124
Plaintiff:
Paul Apollo Gornick, Sr.
Defendant:
PBSP-Medical/CDCR, Lambert, N. Ikegbu and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Pinola v. California Correctional Health Care Services et al
as 3:2013cv05871
Plaintiff:
Rataja C Pinola
Defendant:
California Correctional Health Care Services, L. D. Zamora, Maureen McLean and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Garland v. Jacobsen et al
as 4:2013cv04779
Plaintiff:
Thomas Garland
Defendant:
D. Jacobsen, S. Risenhoover, M. McLean and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Douglas Jacobsen et al v. First California Bank et al
as 2:2012cv00890
Plaintiff:
Dennis D Jacobsen Family Holdings I LLC, Dennis D Jacobsen Family Holdings II LLC, Dennis D Jacobsen Family Holdings III LLC and others
Defendant:
Does and First California Bank
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.
