Cases 51 - 60 of 133
Gomez v. Gipson et al
as 1:2015cv00726
Plaintiff:
Gabriel Gomez
Defendant:
C. Gipson, A W. Castro, M. Robicheaux and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1983
Jose Luis Mancilla Gonzalez et al v. United State Postal Service et al
as 2:2015cv01415
Defendant:
Does, United State Postal Service and United States of America
Plaintiff:
Maria Espinoza, Jose Luis Mancilla Gonzalez, A. M. and others
Balkowitsch et al v. D&M Development Inc. et al
as 2:2015at00109
Plaintiff:
John Balkowitsch , Nancy Balkowitsch , Madhu Sharma and others
Defendant:
D&M Development Inc., James Dusa, Ryan Dusa and others
Cause Of Action: 12 U.S.C. § 22 Securities Fraud
Balkowitsch et al v. D&M Development Inc. et al
as 2:2015cv00196
Plaintiff:
John Balkowitsch , Nancy Balkowitsch , Madhu Sharma and others
Defendant:
D&M Development Inc., James Dusa, Ryan Dusa and others
Cause Of Action: 12 U.S.C. § 22
Mayes et al v. The State of Oregon et al
as 1:2014cv02042
Defendant:
Robert S. Bain, Lindi Baker, Thomas A. Balmer and others
Plaintiff:
Jonathan D M Mayes and Michael L Mayes
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Perez v. Beard et al
as 1:2014cv01723
Plaintiff:
Tomas Perez
Defendant:
Jeffrey Beard, Connie Gibpson, S. Wilson and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Lawrence Hash v. Charles Lee, et al
as 14-16727
Plaintiff - Appellant:
LAWRENCE GEORGE HASH
Defendant - Appellee:
CHARLES DUDLEY LEE, Health Care Manager, SVSP, J. G. ARCEO, C. BLACKSTONE and others
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2014cv03327
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Richard Crane v. S. Hatton, et al
as 14-15745
Plaintiff - Appellant:
RICHARD JOSEPH CRANE
Defendant - Appellee:
S. HATTON, D. M. MANTEL, BIAGINI and others
Maurice Olivier v. Matthew Cate, et al
as 14-15467
Plaintiff - Appellant:
MAURICE P. OLIVIER, AKA Maurice Pierre Olivier
Defendant - Appellee:
MATTHEW CATE, R. WHITE, C. B. TUCKER 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.
