Cases 1 - 10 of 290
Gonzalez v. Chappell et al
as 3:2024cv02737
Plaintiff:
Eric L. Gonzalez
Defendant:
Kevin Chappell, Eleanore Adams, Brian Lutz and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Deshawn Chappell v.N. McDowell et al
as 5:2023cv00025
Plaintiff:
Deshawn Chappell
Defendant:
N. McDowell, S. Lopez, N. Nunez and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
(HC) Chappell v. St. Andre
as 2:2022cv01429
Petitioner:
Blake H Chappell
Respondent:
St. Andre
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Chappell v. McDowell et al
as 3:2022cv01241
Plaintiff:
Deshawn Chappell
Defendant:
N. McDowell, S. Lopez, N. Nunez and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr Prisoner Civil Rights
(PC) Eddington v. Chappelle, et al.,
as 2:2022cv00341
Plaintiff:
Melvin LaVern Eddington, Jr.
Defendant:
A. Chappelle, M. Young and Rios
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
(HC) Chappell v. Kiebler
as 2:2022cv00259
Petitioner:
Blake Chappell
Respondent:
B. Kiebler
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
(PC) McClendon v. Secretary of CDCR et al
as 2:2021cv02088
Plaintiff:
Dennis E. McClendon
Defendant:
Secretary of CDCR, Warden of CMF, Facility CDW of CMF and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
(PC) Williams-Mootry v. Benbrook et al
as 2:2021cv00229
Defendant:
P - Barker, S. Lickiss, C. Elston and others
Plaintiff:
Lonnie Mo'nique Williams-Mootry, Lonnie Clark Williams and Lonnie Mo
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
(PC) Adams v. Chappell
as 2:2020cv00844
Defendant:
Kevin Chappell
Plaintiff:
Brian Trent Adams
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Jeremy M. Kashkari v. Riverside County Sheriff Dept. et al
as 5:2018cv02591
Defendant:
Deputy John Doe No. 1, Deputy Chappell, Riverside County Sheriff Dept. and others
Plaintiff:
Jeremy M. Kashkari and Jeremy M Kashkari
Cause Of Action: 28 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.
