Cases 11 - 20 of 75
Newton v. Eatmon et al
as 3:2019cv00511
Defendant:
T. Villanueva and Officer S. Eatmon
Plaintiff:
Theodore J. Newton
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr
Fields v. Gamboa et al
as 3:2018cv04179
Plaintiff:
Kevin E. Fields
Defendant:
Brett Akins, Troy Newton, Roy Jiminez and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Stribling v. California Department of Correction and Rehabilitation
as 4:2018cv03479
Plaintiff:
Aaron Lamont Stribling
Defendant:
California Department of Correction and Rehabilitation, Ross Haynie, Duane Cleveland and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Rodriguez v. McDowell et al
as 3:2018cv00848
Plaintiff:
Pedro Rodriguez
Defendant:
Neil McDowell, S. Moore, Maletz and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Whitall v. Phan et al
as 5:2017cv05889
Plaintiff:
Raymond Richard Whitall
Defendant:
Stephanie Tran Phan, A. Newton, Ms. Dowless and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Reyes v. Rasheed et al
as 3:2017cv05563
Plaintiff:
Gerardo Reyes
Defendant:
Karim Rasheed, Sani Eye Center, Javad Sani and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Iniguez v. Newton
as 3:2016cv02601
Plaintiff:
Jose Iniguez
Defendant:
Patricia Newton
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Diaz v. California Correctional Health Care Services et al
as 3:2016cv02248
Plaintiff:
Ronald Carlos Diaz, SR.
Defendant:
California Correctional Health Care Services, Sidighi, Newton and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Diaz v. California Correctional Health Care Services et al
as 3:2016cv02244
Plaintiff:
Ronald Carlos Diaz, SR.
Defendant:
California Correctional Health Care Services, Sidighi, Newton and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Diaz v. California Correctional Health Care Services et al
as 3:2016cv02245
Plaintiff:
Ronald Carlos Diaz, SR.
Defendant:
California Correctional Health Care Services, Sidighi, Newton and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
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.
