Cases 21 - 30 of 60
Suen v. State of California et al
as 3:2015cv04020
Plaintiff:
David F. Suen
Defendant:
State of California, California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation, D. Conover and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
COOK v. MAINE DEPT OF CORRECTIONS et al
as 1:2014cv00407
Plaintiff:
CHRISTOPHER M COOK
Defendant:
MAINE DEPT OF CORRECTIONS, MAINE STATE PRISON, JOSEPH FITZPATRICK and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Scott Cook v. Matthew Cate, et al
as 14-16769
Plaintiff - Appellee:
SCOTT TROY COOK
Defendant - Appellant:
MATTHEW CATE, Current Director of CDCR, F. JUAQUEZ, Current Warden at PBSP, G. D. LEWIS, Previous Warden at PBSP and others
Cook v. Thomas
as 1:2014cv00312
Petitioner:
Antwon M. Cook
Respondent:
J.E. Thomas
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241
Cook v. Marshall
as 3:2014cv00002
Petitioner:
Kim M. Cook
Respondent:
L. Dean Marshall
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Cook v. Southern Health Partners et al
as 2:2013cv00048
Plaintiff:
George M Cook
Defendant:
Southern Health Partners, Franchesca Shoun, Chris Mathes and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Cook v. Southern Health Partners et al
as 2:2013cv00030
Plaintiff:
George M Cook
Defendant:
Southern Health Partners, Franchesca Shoun, Chris Mathes and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Cleveland v. Pinal County Superior Court et al
as 2:2012cv01942
Plaintiff:
Christopher Lamar Cleveland
Defendant:
Pinal County Superior Court, State Bar of Arizona, Paula M Cook and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Mitchell v. Clark et al
as 1:2012cv00878
Plaintiff:
Vernon Mitchell
Defendant:
A. Clark, Kattie Hamlin and M. Cook
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Harold Shamburger v. Richard Kirkland, et al
as 12-15841
Plaintiff - Appellant:
HAROLD B. SHAMBURGER
Defendant - Appellee:
RICHARD J. KIRKLAND, T. JOURDEN, G. ATER 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.
