Cases 1 - 10 of 81
Hernandez v. Chandler, City of et al
as 2:2023cv01400
Plaintiff:
Mario Alberto Hernandez
Defendant:
Chandler, City of, Chandler Municipal Court, Chandler Police Department and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441 Petition for Removal- Civil Rights Act
Haro v. USA
as 4:2023cv00326
Petitioner:
Sergio Antonio Haro
Respondent:
USA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255 Motion to Vacate / Correct Illegal Sentence
(PC) Thomas v. Haros, et al.
as 1:2023cv00452
Plaintiff:
Prentice Ray Thomas
Defendant:
Paul Haros and Fresno County Sheriff Department
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
(PC) Meyers v. Kernan et al
as 1:2022cv00539
Plaintiff:
Leon Lee Meyers
Defendant:
Scott Kernan, K. Allison, R. Gamboa and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
(PC) Haro v. Nguyen et al
as 1:2022cv00448
Plaintiff:
Johnny Joe Haro
Defendant:
T. Nguyen, Kai-Chin Jeng and Gordon Lai
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
LePrinceton Dewon Burks v. Los Angeles Police Department et al
as 2:2021cv06038
Plaintiff:
LePrinceton Dewon Burks
Defendant:
Los Angeles Police Department, Bradley Schumacher, Martin Pinner and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Haro v. County of Porter Indiana et al
as 2:2021cv00131
Defendant:
County of Porter Indiana, Porter County Sheriff's Department and Darrolyn S Bradley
Plaintiff:
Raquel Haro
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Grant v. Haro et al
as 3:2020cv06562
Defendant:
Sgt. P. Garcia, Warden (A) M. Biter, Officer Haro and others
Plaintiff:
Patrick Grant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Haro v. USA
as 8:2020cv00236
Respondent:
USA
Petitioner:
Luis Haro
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255
Umarbaev et al v. Moore et al
as 3:2020cv01279
Defendant:
Matthew T Albence, Marc J Moore, Warden Jimmy Johnson and others
Petitioner:
Lee Alejandro Espinoza Urbina, Edgar Haro Osuna, Kirk Golding and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1651
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.
