Cases 1 - 10 of 26
(PC) Thomas v. Chapa
as 1:2024cv00506
Plaintiff:
Michael Thomas
Defendant:
Chapa
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
(PC) Duclos v. Smith et al
as 2:2024cv01034
Plaintiff:
McGhee Tony Duclos
Defendant:
D. Smith, J. Servin, S. Santiago and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
(PC) Thomas v. Pfeiffer et al
as 1:2023cv01232
Plaintiff:
Michael Thomas
Defendant:
Christian Pfeiffer, Akau, Mohammed Ali and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
(PS) Chapa v. Natomas Park Master Association Board of Directors et al
as 2:2023cv01565
Plaintiff:
Alexandra M. Chapa
Defendant:
Natomas Park Master Association Board of Directors, Levy, Erlanger & Company LLP, Lyon Real Estate Natomas and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Chapa v. Natomas Park Master Association Board of Directors et al
as 1:2023cv01118
Plaintiff:
Alexandra M. Chapa
Defendant:
Natomas Park Master Association Board of Directors, Levy, Erlanger & Company LLP, Lyon Real Estate Natomas and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2019cv01200
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 12101
(SS) Chapa v. Commissioner of Social Security
as 1:2019cv00810
Defendant:
Commissioner of Social Security
Plaintiff:
Ismael Chapa
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 402
Pfarr v. Chapa-De Indian Health Pro
as 2:2018cv01710
Plaintiff:
Tim Pfarr
Defendant:
Chapa-De Indian Health Pro
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441
Vargas v. Shanklin et al
as 2:2016cv02944
Plaintiff:
Stacy Vargas
Defendant:
Nicole Shanklin and Chapa-De Indian Health, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1402
United States of America v. Chapa
as 1:2016cv01699
Petitioner:
United States of America
Respondent:
Julian C Chapa
Cause Of Action: 26 U.S.C. § 7402
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.