Cases 21 - 30 of 44
Favor v. Richard J. Donovan Correctional Facility et al
as 2:2015cv01396
Plaintiff:
Brandon Alexander Favor
Defendant:
Richard J. Donovan Correctional Facility, R. Allah, L. Romero and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2015cv00246
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Christian v. California Department of Corrections & Rehabilitation, et al
as 2:2015cv00541
Plaintiff:
Emmett Wade Christian
Defendant:
California Department of Corrections & Rehabilitation, T King, M. Vela and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Favor-El v. Richard J. Donovan Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation et al
as 3:2015cv00027
Plaintiff:
Brandon Favor-El
Defendant:
Richard J. Donovan Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation, R. Allan, L. Romero and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Shelton v. Romero
as 2:2014cv02000
Petitioner:
Peter V. Shelton
Respondent:
L. Romero
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
White v. Strayhorn et al
as 3:2014cv01665
Plaintiff:
Toney A. White, III
Defendant:
D. Strayhorn, J. Cariman, Daniel Paramo and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Beattie v. Romero et al
as 3:2014cv01448
Plaintiff:
Michael Louis Beattie
Defendant:
L. Romero, I. Marquez and I. Ugalde
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Romero-Hernandez v. Romig
as 2:2014cv00813
Plaintiff:
Jose L. Romero-Hernandez
Defendant:
Jeffrey L. Romig
Cause Of Action: 16 U.S.C. § 3373 Appeal of Decision - DOI
Ramon Murillo v. Rucker, et al
as 14-55415
Plaintiff - Appellant:
RAMON A. MURILLO
Defendant - Appellee:
RUCKER, Correctional Officer, OWENS, Correctional Officer, CEDANO, Correctional Officer and others
Shawn Woodall v. George Neotti, et al
as 13-55681
Plaintiff - Appellant:
SHAWN JAMES ALLEN WOODALL
Defendant - Appellee:
GEORGE A. NEOTTI, Warden, A ALLAMBY, Correctional Lieutenant, L. ROBLES, Correctional Officer and others
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.
