Cases 1 - 10 of 10
Doe v. Tradeshift, Inc. et al
as 4:2024cv00166
Plaintiff:
Jane Doe
Defendant:
Tradeshift, Inc., Tradeshift Holdings, Inc., Morten Sondergaard and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question
Ransdell v. Dolgen California, LLC
as 1:2022cv00933
Plaintiff:
Jessica Ransdell
Defendant:
Dolgen California, LLC
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Petition for Removal
Neel et al v. County of San Diego et al
as 3:2018cv01764
Defendant:
Does 1-10, County of San Diego and Amy Meidigner
Plaintiff:
Rs. N., Rg. N., David Neel and others
Guardian Ad Litem:
Judith Ransdell
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 bv
United States of America v. Nolan Mitchell Ransdell
as 2:2015cv00293
Defendant:
Nolan Mitchell Ransdell
Plaintiff:
United States of America
ACE European Group Limited v. Nolan Mitchell Ransdell et al
as 2:2014cv03721
Plaintiff:
ACE European Group Limited
Defendant:
Does, Nolan Mitchell Ransdell and Amanda Lee Wasvary-Ransdell
Mark Muszynski v. D. L. Runnels, et al
as 10-15808
Plaintiff - Appellant:
MARK S. MUSZYNSKI
Defendant - Appellee:
D. L. RUNNELS, S. RANSDELL and J. BRIDDLE
Mark Muszynski v. D. L. Runnels, et al
as 09-16133
Plaintiff - Appellant:
MARK S. MUSZYNSKI
Defendant - Appellee:
D. L. RUNNELS, S. RANSDELL and J. BRIDDLE
Thomas Clinton v. CDC, et al
as 08-17288
Plaintiff - Appellant:
THOMAS CLINTON
Defendant - Appellee:
CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, CALIFORNIA CORRECTIONAL CENTER, K. PROSPER and others
Thomas Clinton v. California Department of Corre, et al
as 08-16377
Plaintiff - Appellant:
THOMAS CLINTON
Defendant - Appellee:
CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, CALIFORNIA CORRECTIONAL CENTER, K. PROSPER and others
Thomas Clinton v. California Department of Corre, et al
as 08-16121
Plaintiff - Appellant:
THOMAS CLINTON
Defendant - Appellee:
CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, CALIFORNIA CORRECTIONAL CENTER, K. PROSPER 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.
