Cases 71 - 80 of 244
(PC) Asoau v. County of Sacramento et al
as 2:2020cv01344
Plaintiff:
Matthew Asoau
Defendant:
Scott Jones, Rio Cosumnes Correctional Center, County of Sacramento and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
(PC) Davis v. County of Sacramento et al
as 2:2020cv01347
Plaintiff:
Fitzgerald Davis
Defendant:
County of Sacramento, Scott Jones Sheriff's Dept and Rio Consumnes Correctional Center
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
(PC) Faletui v. County of Sacramento et al
as 2:2020cv01342
Defendant:
County of Sacramento, Scott Jones and Rio Cosumnes Correctional Center
Plaintiff:
Lewis Faletui
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
(PC) Todd v. Sacramento County et al
as 2:2020cv01442
Defendant:
Sacramento County, Britton, B. Rose and others
Plaintiff:
Trevor Todd
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
David Hunter, et al v. Scott Jones, et al
as 20-15990
Defendant / Appellee:
JACKSON, Badge #713 and SCOTT JONES
Plaintiff:
DEANDRE FOWLER
Plaintiff / Appellant:
DAVID SAMPSON HUNTER
(HC) Kanongata'a v. Jones et al
as 2:2020cv00973
Respondent:
Scott Jones and Sacramento County
Petitioner:
Grame Kali Kanongata'a
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
(SS) Jones v. Commissioner of Social Security
as 1:2020cv00462
Plaintiff:
Randy Scott Jones
Defendant:
Commissioner of Social Security
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 402
(PC) Fowler v. Jones et al
as 2:2020cv00555
Defendant:
Sac. County Jail, Sheriff's Sac. Department, Jackson and others
Plaintiff:
DeAndre Fowler
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
(PC) Bell v. Jones
as 2:2020cv00793
Plaintiff:
Eric Bell, Sr.
Defendant:
Gavin Newsom, Scott Jones and Sacramento Superior Court Presiding Judge
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Qualls et al v. County of Sacramento et al
as 2:2020cv00612
Defendant:
County of Sacramento and Scott Jones
Plaintiff:
Michael Qualls, Chad McLaughlin, Heather Qualls and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441
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.
