Cases 1 - 10 of 34
Carter v. O'Malley
as 4:2024cv03062
Plaintiff:
Eric Charles Carter
Defendant:
Martin J. O'Malley
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 405 Review of HHS Decision (SSID)
Olson v. Amador County Superior Court
as 23-4020
Petitioner / Appellant:
ERIC CHARLES OLSON
Respondent / Appellee:
AMADOR COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT
(HC) Olson v. Alameda County Superior Court
as 2:2023cv02384
Petitioner:
Eric Charles Olson
Respondent:
Amador County Superior Court
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Eric K'napp v. Craig Koenig
as 20-15184
Petitioner / Appellant:
ERIC CHARLES RODNEY K'NAPP, AKA Eric C.R. K'napp
Respondent / Appellee:
RALPH DIAZ and CRAIG KOENIG, Acting Warden
Eric K'napp v. Craig Koenig
as 20-70348
Petitioner:
ERIC CHARLES RODNEY K'NAPP, AKA Eric C.R. K'napp
Respondent:
CRAIG KOENIG, Acting Warden
(HC) Knapp v. Diaz
as 2:2019cv02066
Respondent:
Ralph Diaz
Petitioner:
Eric Charles Rodney Knapp
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Eric K'napp v. USDC-SAC
as 18-72247
:
In re: ERIC CHARLES RODNEY K'NAPP
Petitioner:
ERIC CHARLES RODNEY K'NAPP
Respondent:
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, SACRAMENTO
Real Party In Interest:
EDMUND G. BROWN, Jr., CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS AND REHABILITATION and SCOTT KERNAN
K'napp v. Brown et al
as 2:2017cv00742
Plaintiff:
Eric Charles Rodney Knapp
Defendant:
Edmund G. Brown, Jr., California Department of Corrections and Rehabiliation and Scott Kernan
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Eric K'napp v. Edmund Brown, Jr., et al
as 17-15577
Plaintiff - Appellant:
ERIC CHARLES RODNEY K'NAPP
Defendant - Appellee:
EDMUND G. BROWN, Jr., CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS AND REHABILITATION, CALIFORNIA CORRECTIONAL HEALTH CARE SERVICES and others
Knapp v. Unknown
as 2:2016cv02983
Petitioner:
Eric Charles Rodney Knapp
Respondent:
Unknown
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
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.
