Cases 1 - 10 of 67
MURZIKE v. GIELOW et al
as 3:2024cv00221
Plaintiff:
JAMES T. MURZIKE
Defendant:
W GIELOW, K PERKINS, J STREIT and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
MURZIKE v. CARR et al
as 3:2024cv00211
Plaintiff:
JAMES T. MURZIKE
Defendant:
J E CARR, T DYKES, C W CATTNACH and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
TIERNEY v. SCRUGGS et al
as 3:2023cv24768
Plaintiff:
CHRISTOPHER M TIERNEY
Defendant:
SCRUGGS, B WENTZ, JOHN DOE and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
CHESTNUT v. ROSE et al
as 4:2022cv00465
Defendant:
Amy Rose, JAMES CARTER, LUIS RODRIGUEZ and others
Plaintiff:
GERNARD D CHESTNUT
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Wentz v. Ames et al
as 2:2022cv00528
Plaintiff:
Charles Michael Wentz
Defendant:
Superintendent Donald Ames, Asso. Superintendent Jonathan Frame, Major Josh Ward and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
PERMENTER v. ARMEL et al
as 2:2022cv02892
Petitioner:
RYSHEEN PERMENTER
Respondent:
ERIC T. ARMEL, DEBORAH I. CARPENTER, JOHN J. TALABER and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federal)
CHESTNUT v. LEAVINS et al
as 3:2021cv00944
Plaintiff:
GERNARD DENEZ CHESTNUT
Defendant:
DONALD LEAVINS, JACOBSON, ROESKE and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
CHESTNUT v. LEAVINS
as 3:2021cv00827
Plaintiff:
GERNARD DENEZ CHESTNUT
Defendant:
DONALD LEAVINS, ROESKE, TRUMBLE and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Armstead v. Haynes et al
as 3:2020cv05327
Defendant:
Kendra Wakefield, Annice Mizin, Robert Herzog and others
Plaintiff:
Wendell M Armstead, Jr, Casey Woodson, Justin T Dull and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
(PC)Johnson v. CDCR et al
as 2:2019cv01752
Defendant:
D. Hollandsworth, Robert David, B. Speiker and others
Plaintiff:
Charles Johnson
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441
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.
