Cases 31 - 40 of 58
Vaught IV v. Phillips et al
as 3:2020cv01728
Defendant:
S. Livelo, M. Pollard, B.D. Phillips and others
Plaintiff:
Elbert Lee Vaught IV
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr
Allen v. Buckel et al
as 3:2020cv01642
Respondent:
John Doe, R. Buckel and M. Pollard
Petitioner:
Michael Dewayne Allen
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Charles Allen v. J. Cardenas, et al
as 20-55789
Defendant / Appellee:
RALPH M. DIAZ, Acting Secretary for the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation, Secretary of CDCR, J. CARDENAS, Correctional Officer, M. POLLARD, Chief Deputy Warden and others
Plaintiff / Appellant:
CHARLES EDWARD ALLEN
Charles Allen v. J. Cardenas, et al
as 20-55788
Defendant / Appellee:
RALPH M. DIAZ, Acting Secretary for the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation, Secretary of CDCR, J. CARDENAS, Correctional Officer, M. POLLARD, Chief Deputy Warden and others
Plaintiff / Appellant:
CHARLES EDWARD ALLEN
Shumonte White v. State of California et al
as 2:2020cv06726
Respondent:
State of California and M. Pollard
Petitioner:
Shumonte White
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Ivy v. Wingo et al
as 3:2020cv01345
Defendant:
C/O P. Wingo, K. Cottrell, M. Pollard and others
Plaintiff:
John Ivy
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr
Daniel Joseph Marquez v. M. Pollard et al
as 8:2020cv01190
Petitioner:
Daniel Joseph Marquez
Respondent:
Xavier Becerra and M. Pollard
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Mendoza v. Pollard et al
as 3:2020cv00847
Respondent:
Xavier Becerra and M. Pollard
Petitioner:
Robert Angel Mendoza
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Jonathan McDowell v. M. Pollard
as 5:2020cv00968
Petitioner:
Jonathan McDowell
Respondent:
M. Pollard
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Allen v. Cardenas et al
as 3:2020cv00788
Defendant:
M. Carrillo, Ralph M. Diaz, L. Wood and others
Plaintiff:
Charles Edward Allen
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr
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.
