Cases 41 - 50 of 248
Melvin Simmons, Jr. v. State of California, et al
as 20-16055
Defendant / Appellee:
DAVID BAUGHMAN, Warden, Warden and Chief Executive Officer CSP Sac, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, HELENA R. GWEON, Public Service Seat of Administrate Law Judge and others
Plaintiff / Appellant:
MELVIN JOSEPH SIMMONS, Jr.
David Florence v. S. Kernan, et al
as 20-15855
Plaintiff / Appellant:
DAVID FLORENCE
Defendant / Appellee:
S. KERNAN, Secretary of CDCR, K. ALLISON, Director of CDCR, B. KIBLER, Chief Deputy Warden and others
Forrest Jones, et al v. Ralph Diaz, et al
as 20-15795
Plaintiff / Appellant:
DENNIS BARNES, on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated, RODRIGO RUBEN ESCARCEGA and FORREST LEE JONES
Defendant / Appellee:
SCOTT KERNAN, in his individual capacity and RALPH DIAZ, Secretary of the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation, in his individual and official capacities
Fidel Gallardo v. Scott Kernan
as 20-55430
Petitioner / Appellant:
FIDEL ANGUIANO GALLARDO
Respondent / Appellee:
SCOTT KERNAN, Secretary of the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation
Allen Hammler v. Scott Kernan, et al
as 20-15774
Plaintiff / Appellant:
ALLEN HAMMLER
Defendant / Appellee:
M. SIMAS, Correctional Officer and SCOTT KERNAN, Secretary of CDCR
Kevin Dunigan v. CDCR, et al
as 20-15723
Defendant / Appellee:
DEBBIE ASUNCION, Warden, MOZ, A. SWEABY and others
Plaintiff / Appellant:
KEVIN W. DUNIGAN
Nieblas et al v. Porch.com Incorporated et al
as 4:2020cv00171
Plaintiff:
Patrick Coco, Paul Ryals, Ann Taylor and others
Defendant:
Porch.com Incorporated, Matthew Ehrlichman, GoSmith Incorporated and others
Cause Of Action: 47 U.S.C. ยง 227
Allen Hammler v. Director of CDCR, et al
as 20-15675
Plaintiff / Appellant:
ALLEN HAMMLER
Defendant / Appellee:
SCOTT KERNAN
Defendant:
CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS AND REHABILITATION and DIRECTOR OF CDCR
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.
