Cases 31 - 40 of 170
Walsh v. Ensemble Designs Inc. et al
as 2:2021at01226
Plaintiff:
Secretary of Labor Marty Walsh
Defendant:
Ensemble Designs Inc., Ensemble Designs SIMPLE IRA Plan and David G.S. Wood
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1132
(PC) Biagas v. State of California et al
as 2:2021cv02242
Plaintiff:
Vincent James Biagas, Sr.
Defendant:
State of California, California Department of Corrections Secretary, Lancaster Director and IT and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
(PC) McClendon v. Secretary of CDCR et al
as 2:2021cv02088
Plaintiff:
Dennis E. McClendon
Defendant:
Secretary of CDCR, Warden of CMF, Facility CDW of CMF and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
(HC) Johnson v. Secretary of Corrections
as 1:2021cv01560
Petitioner:
Eric Johnson
Respondent:
Secretary of Corrections
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
(PC) Fox v. CDCR Secretary et al
as 1:2021cv01501
Plaintiff:
Freddy T. Fox
Defendant:
CDCR Secretary, Pallares, Williams and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2021cv01860
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 451
(PC)Stith v. Darlene et al
as 2:2021cv01478
Plaintiff:
Theodore Ervin Stith
Defendant:
Secretary Darlene, Simmons and Darlene
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
(PC) LeBlue v. CDCR et al
as 2:2021cv01389
Plaintiff:
Brandon LeBlue
Defendant:
California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation and Secretary of CDCR
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
(PC) Barnes v. Supreme Court Judges et al
as 1:2021cv01078
Plaintiff:
Antoine Deshawn Barnes
Defendant:
Supreme Court Judges, Gavin Newsom, CDCR Secretary Prop 57 and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
(PC) Givens v. Lotesztain et al
as 1:2021cv00530
Defendant:
Dr. Mayes, Michael Gonzaga, Dr. N. Largoza and others
Plaintiff:
Francois P. Givens
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
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.
