Cases 51 - 60 of 238
David Lancaster v. Board of Prison Terms, et al
as 11-17366
Petitioner - Appellant:
DAVID GENE LANCASTER
Respondent - Appellee:
BOARD OF PRISON TERMS and ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 5:2011cv01596
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Andrew Kwasi Donkor v. The United States of America et al
as 5:2011cv01518
Defendant:
Bob Backes, Edmund G Brown, Jr, California Board of Parole and others
Plaintiff:
Andrew Kwasi Donkor
Smith v. Superior Court of the County of Fresno et al
as 1:2011cv01535
Plaintiff:
Lamont Gus Smith
Defendant:
Superior Court of the County of Fresno, State Department of Mental Health, CDCR Mental Health and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Andrew Kwasi Donkor v. The United States of America et al
as 5:2011cv01409
Defendant:
Paul R Babeu, Bob Backes, R Benvenue and others
Plaintiff:
Andrew Kwasi Donkor
Andrew Kwasi Donker v. The United States of America et al
as 5:2011cv01406
Defendant:
Paul R Babeu, Bob Backes, Leticia Beltran and others
Plaintiff:
Andrew Kwasi Donkor
Churchill v. California Department of Corrections Board of Prison Terms et al
as 3:2011cv03711
Plaintiff:
David Harlow Churchill
Defendant:
California Department of Corrections Board of Prison Terms and State Parole CCPOA
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Churchill v. California Department of Corrections et al
as 2:2011cv01968
Plaintiff:
David H Churchill
Defendant:
California Department of Corrections, Board of Prison Term and State Parole
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Anthony Tillman v. Board of Prison Term
as 11-16534
Plaintiff - Appellant:
ANTHONY BRYANT TILLMAN
Defendant - Appellee:
BOARD OF PRISON TERMS
Case v. Board of Prison Terms et.al.
as 5:2011cv03042
Petitioner:
James T. Case
Defendant:
Board of Prison Terms, Jerry Brown and Nancy Hardy
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.
