Cases 1 - 10 of 18
Lovell v. Sanchez et al
as 3:2024cv02071
Plaintiff:
David Anthony Lovell, II
Defendant:
Deputy Sanchez and Taylor
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
(PC) Ryland v. Director of Federal Bureau of Prison(s) et al
as 1:2023cv01307
Plaintiff:
Corey R Ryland
Defendant:
Director of Federal Bureau of Prison(s), North Central Regional Director, J.C. Streeval and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Federal Question: Bivens Act
(PC) Lovell v. East Oakland Police Department et al
as 2:2023cv00479
Plaintiff:
David Anthony Lovell, II
Defendant:
East Oakland Police Department, Highland Hospital, Alameda County and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
(PC) Lovell v. Sanchez et al
as 2:2023cv00480
Plaintiff:
David Anthony Lovell, II
Defendant:
Sanchez and Taylor
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
(PC) Underwood v. Mayes
as 2:2022cv00694
Plaintiff:
Errol Lovell Underwood
Defendant:
Robert Mayes and CCHCS
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
(PC) Lovell v. Wakabayashi et al
as 2:2019cv01555
Defendant:
Claudine, J Greiner, E. Guzman and others
Plaintiff:
David Anthony Lovell, III and David Anthony Lovell, II
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Chapman v. Voong et al
as 2:2017cv01138
Plaintiff:
Lovelle Chapman
Defendant:
M. Voong, D. Foston and S. K. Hemenway
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Rhey v. Ogbuehi et al
as 1:2017cv00718
Plaintiff:
Choon Rhey
Defendant:
Infeoma Ogbuehi, Felix Igbinosa, Adrian Pineda and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Underwood v. Tan et al.
as 2:2017cv00174
Plaintiff:
Errol Lovell Underwood
Defendant:
Richard Tan, Cole, Eqipto and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Corey Lovell Arnold v. Warden Josie Gastelo et al
as 2:2016cv01218
Plaintiff:
Corey Lovell Arnold
Defendant:
A. Carlson and Warden Josie Gastelo
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.
