Cases 1 - 9 of 9
David Kagan et al v. City of Los Angeles, et al
as 2:2020cv05515
Defendant:
CITY OF LOS ANGELES, City of Los Angeles Housing + Community Investment Department and City of Los Angeles Housing and Community Investment Department
Plaintiff:
Mr David Kagan, Mrs. Rachel K Revere, Mrs. Judith Kagan and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
McQueen v. Osborne et al
as 1:2018cv01534
Defendant:
Judge Roxanne Osborne, Klamath County, Klamath County Sheriff's Office and others
Plaintiff:
Mark Douglas McQueen, Sr.
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Angela Kashfian v. Shirzad Abrams et al
as 2:2013cv00904
Defendant:
Parvin Abrams, Shirzad Abrams, Mr Frank Bush and others
Plaintiff:
Angela Kashfian
Benson Sr. v. Franke
as 2:2012cv01099
Petitioner:
Michael David Benson Sr.
Respondent:
Mr. Franke
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Wilson v. Archer et al
as 2:2012cv01082
Defendant:
Sgt. Archer, Mr. Deacon, John Doe 1 and others
Plaintiff:
Samuel Earl Wilson
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Mr Frank M Rosales v. Michael J Astrue
as 8:2012cv00753
Defendant:
Michael J Astrue
Plaintiff:
Mr. Frank M Rosales
Martin v. Dewsnup et al
as 6:2011cv06420
ODOC:
Darryl Borello, Stan Czerniak and Randy Geer
SRCI:
Sergeant Brittain, Jane Doe #1, John Doe #1 and others
OSP:
Melissa Davidson, Dr. Degner, John Doe #10 and others
Defendant:
Dr. Dewsnup, Oregon State Penitentiary and Snake River Correctional Institution
Plaintiff:
Shawn Michael Martin
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Moody Woodrow Tanksley v. Uris et al
as 2:2011cv08465
Defendant:
Ms Aforma Ededolum, Ms Colleen Garren, Mr Mike Lacey and others
Plaintiff:
Moody Woodrow Tanksley
Rios v. Franke
as 3:2010cv01548
Respondent:
Mr. Franke
Petitioner:
Richard Rios
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
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.
