Cases 41 - 50 of 415
(HC) Reyna v. Cisneros
as 2:2022cv02295
Petitioner:
Antonio Alfonso Reyna
Respondent:
Theresa Cisneros
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
(PC) Barber v. Reyna
as 1:2022cv01594
Plaintiff:
James Eugene Barber
Defendant:
V. Reyna
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Cedillos De Garay, et al. v. Garland
as 22-1999
Petitioner:
REYNA ELIZABETH CEDILLOS DE GARAY and JAIRO ALEXANDER GARAY CEDILLOS
Respondent:
MERRICK B. GARLAND, ATTORNEY GENERAL
John Hardney v. E. Castillo et al
as 2:2022cv08788
Plaintiff:
John Hardney
Defendant:
E. Castillo, C. Newberry, J. Reyna and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Pope v. San Jose Regional Trauma Unit
as 5:2022cv07338
Plaintiff:
George Pope
Defendant:
San Jose Regional Trauma Unit, Insurance Company of the West and Reyna Custom Chopping
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 22-56079
Petitioner / Appellant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Respondent / Appellee:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Najera-Gomez, et al. v. Garland
as 22-1816
Petitioner:
REYNA DEL CARMEN NAJERA-GOMEZ and JUSTIN ORLANDO VASQUES-NAJERA
Respondent:
MERRICK B. GARLAND, ATTORNEY GENERAL
Maria Reyna Moreno v. Haroldo Gregorio Lopez Barrios et al
as 2:2022cv07463
Plaintiff:
Maria Reyna Moreno
Defendant:
Haroldo Gregorio Lopez Barrios, Lilia Marce Lopez, Shawna Louise Alcala-Antonio doing business as TAT Property Management and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 405 Fair Housing Act
Clear Blue Insurance Co. v. B and G Realty, LLC et al
as 2:2022cv07449
Plaintiff:
CLEAR BLUE INSURANCE CO.
Defendant:
B&G REALTY, LLC, BALSAS, LLC, MANUEL E. SANCHEZ and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2201 Declaratory Judgment
Sanchez-Argueta v. Garland
as 22-1685
Petitioner:
REYNA ESMERALDA SANCHEZ-ARGUETA
Respondent:
MERRICK B. GARLAND, ATTORNEY GENERAL
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.
