Cases 51 - 60 of 56,041
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 8:2024cv01233
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 05 U.S.C. § 551 Administrative Procedure Act
Rice v. Wasserman Media Group, LLC
as 2:2024cv04781
Plaintiff:
John Curtis Rice
Defendant:
Wasserman Media Group, LLC
Cause Of Action: 17 U.S.C. § 501 Copyright Infringement
In re: John Doe Juror Number Seven
as 2:2024cv01067
Not Yet Classified:
Juror John Doe
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question
Le v. Sacramento Mental Health Treatment Center et al
as 3:2024cv05447
Plaintiff:
Khanh M Le
Defendant:
Sacramento Mental Health Treatment Center, Tonya Ovell and John Grozdanic
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Williams v. Pollard, et al.
as 24-3582
Plaintiff:
JOHN WESLEY WILLIAMS
Defendant:
MARCUS POLLARD, Warden, R. BUCKEL, Chief Deputy Warden, O. NAVARRO and others
Victoria Tenisha Shanae Dillihunt v. Danica Roem et al
as 2:2024cv04886
Plaintiff:
Victoria Tenisha Shanae Dillihunt
Defendant:
Danica Roem, Phyllis Randolph Frye, Mickey Leland Courthouse and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Norato v. Zuckerberg San Francisco General Hospital
as 5:2024cv03408
Plaintiff:
Casey John Norato
Defendant:
Zuckerberg San Francisco General Hospital
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Bonilla v. Hayes et al
as 3:2024cv01003
Plaintiff:
Steven Wayne Bonilla
Defendant:
William Q. Hayes, John A. Houston, Judge Bernard G. Skomal and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr Prisoner Civil Rights
Danitz v. Notbohm
as 1:2024cv00244
Plaintiff:
Bradley John Danitz
Defendant:
Rodell Notbohm
Cause Of Action: 23 U.S.C. § 1441 Contract Real Estate
St. John Family Farms, LLC v. Jenks Hatchery, Inc.
as 3:2024cv00907
Plaintiff:
St. John Family Farms, LLC
Defendant:
Jenks Hatchery, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1330 Breach of Contract
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.
