Cases 1 - 10 of 16
Rodney Brown v. Donald Trump, et al
as 21-2460
Plaintiff / Appellant:
Rodney Brown
Defendant / Appellee:
Joseph Steiger, Phil Harden, John Does, 1-3 and others
Rolandis Chatmon v. Dexter Payne, et al
as 21-2389
Defendant / Appellee:
Albert Burton, Grievance Coordinator, Varner Supermax, ADC, Brandon C. Carroll, Chief Security Officer, Varner Supermax Unit, ADC, James Gibson, Warden, Varner Unit, ADC and others
Plaintiff / Appellant:
Rolandis Larenzo Chatmon
Deverick Scott v. Arkansas Div. of Corrections, et al
as 21-1956
Defendant / Appellee:
Rodney Brown, Lieutenant, VSM Unit, Laquista Swopes, Sergeant, VSM Unit, Smallwood, Business Manager, VSM Unit and others
Plaintiff / Appellant:
Deverick Scott
USA v. Rodney Browning
as 20-50308
Defendant / Appellant:
RODNEY BROWNING
Plaintiff / Appellee:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Terry Ward v. Dexter Payne, et al
as 19-3288
Defendant:
Does, Unknown ADC Staff
Defendant / Appellee:
Randy Watson, Prior Warden, Varner/Supermax Unit, ADC, Mark Cashion, Prior Warden, Varner Supermax Unit, ADC, Dexter Payne, Director, ADC and others
Plaintiff / Appellant:
Terry Lee Ward
Rodney Browning v. USDC-CALA
as 18-71747
:
In re: RODNEY BROWNING
Petitioner:
RODNEY BROWNING
Respondent:
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, LOS ANGELES
Real Party In Interest:
STEVE LANGFORD
Rodney Browning v. Steve Langford
as 2:2017cv05540
Petitioner:
Rodney Browning
Respondent:
Steve Langford
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 5:2016cv01217
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1681 Fair Credit Reporting Act
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 5:2015cv01360
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1681
USA v. Rodney Browning
as 14-50299
Plaintiff - Appellee:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Defendant - Appellant:
RODNEY BROWNING
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.
