Cases 21 - 30 of 33
Sharma v. City of Redding
as 2:2017cv00487
Plaintiff:
Narendra Sharma
Defendant:
City of Redding
Receiver:
Richardson Griswold
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Richardson v. Path Logic Now
as 2:2016cv02687
Defendant:
Path Logic Now and Neogenomics
Plaintiff:
(PS) Richardson and Heather Richardson
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Velasco et al v. City of Salinas et al
as 2:2016at00026
Plaintiff:
Jose Velasco and Rita Acosta
Defendant:
City of Salinas, David Pritt, Ciro Barboza and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Graves v. United States Marshall Office et al
as 2:2015cv01135
Plaintiff:
Peter Graves
Defendant:
United States Marshall Office, Department of Justice, Eric Holder and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1981
Richardson v. Coventry Health Care, Inc.
as 2:2014cv00523
Plaintiff:
Latasha Richardson
Defendant:
Coventry Health Care, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441
Richardson v. Coventry Health Care, Inc.
as 2:2014at00230
Plaintiff:
Latasha Richardson
Defendant:
Coventry Health Care, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Employment Discrimination
Dubrin et al v. Bonilla
as 1:2011at00555
Plaintiff:
Dubrin , Richardson, Youngblood and others
Defendant:
Bonilla, Michael Stainer, Bounville and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Sophia Lopez v. Johnson et al
as 1:2009cv02174
Plaintiff:
Sophia Lopez
Defendant:
Martha Johnson and Renee Richardson
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Richardson v. PRISONS et al
as 1:2009at00932
Defendant:
FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS, US DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, WARDEN RIOS and others
Plaintiff:
Tony Richardson
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Jones v. Nesom et al
as 1:2009cv01468
Plaintiff:
Susan Elizabeth Jones
Defendant:
James Nesom, Forrest E. Boomer, Debra Berg and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
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.
