Cases 1 - 10 of 415
Rosa v. Cook
as 24-1101
Plaintiff:
ALEXANDER ROSA
Defendant:
MICHELLE BIELA, SANTORO, HENRY MUSHI and others
Rosa v. Doe
as 24-1044
Plaintiff:
ALEXANDER ROSA
Defendant:
JOHN DOE, Commissioner, JOHN DOE, Warden, VIKI S. BLUMBERG, Medical Doctor and others
Vargas-Nino, et al. v. Garland
as 24-2160
Petitioner:
CRISTIAN CAMILO VARGAS-NINO, LINA YISSEL BARON-SAAVEDRA, NIKOLAS VARGAS-BARON and others
Respondent:
MERRICK B. GARLAND, ATTORNEY GENERAL
Cunningham v. Lupis
as 24-844
Plaintiff:
JAMES E. CUNNINGHAM, SR.
Defendant:
FRANCESCO LUPIS, Dr., COLLEEN GALLAGHER, RUDY ALVAREZ and others
Barone, et al. v. United States District Court for the Central District of California, Los Angeles
as 24-1632
Petitioner:
CHRISTOPHER T. BARONE and DRAGANA BARONE
Respondent:
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, LOS ANGELES
Interested Party:
MERCURY INSURANCE, TINA MAMTA BHATIA and TOD MICHAEL CASTRONOVO
Rosa v. Cook
as 24-489
Plaintiff:
ALEXANDER ROSA
Defendant:
ROLLIN COOK, Former Commissioner of Correction, WILLIAM MULLIGAN, Former District Administrator, BARONE, Warden and others
Stephenson v. Davis
as 24-414
Plaintiff:
JOSEPH STEPHENSON, (Class of One, Pro-se Petitioner)
Defendant:
CARLENE DAVIS, (D.O.C. Counselor Supervisor), ANGEL QUIROS, (Commissioner-Conn. Dept of Correction, BARONE, (Warden, MacDougall State Prison) and others
Scott v. Cerevel Therapeutics Holdings, Inc. et al
as 1:2024cv00099
Plaintiff:
Christopher Scott
Defendant:
Cerevel Therapeutics Holdings, Inc., N. Anthony Coles, Ron Renaud and others
Dixon v. Cerevel Therapeutics Holdings, Inc. et al
as 1:2024cv00100
Plaintiff:
Brian Dixon
Defendant:
Cerevel Therapeutics Holdings, Inc., N. Anthony Coles, Ron Renaud and others
Travers v. Cerevel Therapeutics Holdings, Inc. et al
as 1:2024cv00493
Plaintiff:
John Travers
Defendant:
Cerevel Therapeutics Holdings, Inc., Tony Coles, Ron Renaud and others
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.
