Cases 11 - 20 of 65
Waugh v. Marin County Jail et al
as 3:2014cv00507
Plaintiff:
Jeff Waugh
Defendant:
Marin County Jail and Robert Doyle
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Hawes v. Marin County Sheriff Department et al
as 3:2013cv01711
Plaintiff:
Terry Ray Hawes
Defendant:
Marin County Sheriff Department and Robert Doyle
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Omar Gay v. Anthony Hedgpeth, et al
as 12-57098
Petitioner - Appellant:
OMAR SHARRIEFF GAY
Respondent - Appellee:
ANTHONY HEDGPETH, Warden and ROBERT DOYLE
Jesus Arreola v. Board of Prison Hearings, et al
as 12-17341
Petitioner - Appellant:
JESUS SOLIS ARREOLA
Respondent - Appellee:
BOARD OF PRISON HEARINGS and ROBERT DOYLE
Johnson v. Doyle et al
as 1:2012cv04723
Defendant:
Mable A. Doyle, Robert Doyle and Rodney Doyle
Plaintiff:
John Arthur Johnson
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Veni Fonoti v. Robert Doyle
as 12-55891
Petitioner - Appellant:
VENI WAYNE FONOTI
Respondent - Appellee:
ROBERT DOYLE, Chairman
Veni Wayne Fonoti v. Robert Doyle
as 2:2012cv02715
Respondent:
Robert Doyle
Petitioner:
Veni Wayne Fonoti
Lena et al v. Doyle et al
as 4:2012cv01413
Plaintiff:
Michael Lena
Defendant:
Robert Doyle, Colin Medalie, Bryan McMains and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Murphy v. Oregon Board of Parole and Post-Prison Supervision
as 6:2012cv00350
Petitioner:
Robert Doyle Murphy
Respondent:
Oregon Board of Parole and Post-Prison Supervision
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
David Curtis v. Kathleen Dickinson, et al
as 12-55374
Plaintiff - Appellant:
DAVID SCOTT CURTIS
Defendant - Appellee:
KATHLEEN DICKINSON, Warden of California Medical Facility, official capacity, ROBERT DOYLE, Chairperson, Board of Parole Hearings, official capacity, SANDRA BRYSON, Commissioner, Board of Parole Hearings, official capacity 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.
