Cases 1 - 10 of 143
(PC) Johnson v. Allan et al
as 2:2024cv00861
Plaintiff:
Al-Mon Johnson
Defendant:
K. Allan, S. Childress, C Reynolds and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441 Petition for Removal- Civil Rights Act
Ahadi Abu-Al Muhammad v. County of Riverside et al
as 5:2023cv01260
Plaintiff:
Ahadi Abu-Al Muhammad and Onofre Serrano
Defendant:
County of Riverside, City of Riverside Police Department, M. Rardin and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Marks v. Patel
as 4:2023cv02129
Plaintiff:
John Lee Marks, Jr.
Defendant:
Al Patel
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 4:2023cv01287
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
(HC) Young v. Tate
as 1:2023cv00055
Petitioner:
Kareem Al-Jaml Young
Respondent:
B. M. Tate
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 4:2023cv00068
Petitioner:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1651 Petition for Writ of Mandamus
(PC) Mitchum v. Honea et al
as 2:2022cv02313
Plaintiff:
Michael Ernest Mitchum, Jr
Defendant:
Kory Honea, Hal Brooks, Al Saracini and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Kareem Al-Jamal Young v. B.M. Trate
as 2:2022cv08906
Petitioner:
Kareem Al-Jamal Young
Respondent:
B.M. Trate
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federal)
v. California Dept. of Corrections and Rehabilitation, et al.
as 2:2022at01133
Defendant:
California Dept. of Corrections and Rehabilitation, et al.
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
(PC) Fisher v. Galyen et al
as 2:2022cv01965
Plaintiff:
Al Gene Fisher, Jr.
Defendant:
T Galyen, Martell, Abarca and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
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.
