Cases 21 - 30 of 47
Curry v. Yelp Inc. et al
as 3:2014cv03547
Plaintiff:
Joseph Curry
Defendant:
Yelp Inc., Jeremy Stoppelman, Robert J. Krolik and others
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 78
Dairy et al v. Bonham
as 3:2013cv01518
Plaintiff:
Ralph Dairy , Lynette Dairy , Joseph Spier and others
Defendant:
Charlton Bonham
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Goodspeed v. Nichols et al
as 2:2012cv00807
Plaintiff:
Tony Eugene Goodspeed, II
Defendant:
Colleen M Nichols , Mark S. Curry , Robert P McElhany and others
Cause Of Action: 18 U.S.C. § 1961
New Sensations, Inc. v. Does 1-1474
as 2:2011mc00089
Plaintiff:
New Sensations, Inc.
Defendant:
Does 1-1474
Movant:
Curry Custom Computers
-RCF Ural King v. Ben Curry
as 5:2004cv01107
Respondent:
Ben Curry, Ben Curry and G J Giurbino
Petitioner:
Ural King
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Lawtis Donald Rhoden v. Michael S Carona et al
as 8:2008cv00420
Defendant:
Deputy Baltodano, Deputy Capt D Bergquist, Sheriff Michael S Carona and others
Plaintiff:
Lawtis Donald Rhoden
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Renard Curry et al v. GMAC Mortgage et al
as 2:2010cv08014
Plaintiff:
Renard Curry and Sheree Curry
Defendant:
DOES, GMAC Mortgage and Jeannie Vukovich
-AGR James Dees v. City of Los Angeles et al
as 2:2008cv05786
Defendant:
Detective Salaam Abdul, Detective Salaam Abdul, Lee Baca and others
Plaintiff:
James Dees
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441 Notice of Removal - Civil Rights Act
Smith v. Kane, et al
as 2:2003cv01871
Petitioner:
Anthony Bernard Smith, Jr
Respondent:
Bill Lockyer and B. Curry
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Curry v. City of Oakland et al
as 4:2008cv03695
Plaintiff:
Darrell Curry
Defendant:
City of Oakland , Wayne Tucker , S. Barre 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.
