Cases 11 - 20 of 46
Chapman v. Tucker
as 6:2019cv00404
Petitioner:
Anthony B Chapman
Respondent:
Warden Barry Tucker
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
(PC) Rayford v. Sherman et al
as 1:2019cv00225
Defendant:
S. Magnia, K. Rening, A. Williams and others
Plaintiff:
Eugene Rayford
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
(PC) Rayford v. Sherman et al
as 2:2019cv00246
Defendant:
S. Magnia, K. Rening, A. Williams and others
Plaintiff:
Eugene Rayford
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Chapman (ID 79191) v. Reno County Sheriff's Department
as 5:2018cv03259
Plaintiff:
David B. Chapman
Defendant:
Reno County Sheriff's Department
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Chapman v. Rowhani et al
as 1:2017cv03719
Defendant:
Payam Rowhani, Mina Manuhehri and State Farm Insurance Company
Plaintiff:
Christian B. Chapman
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Chapman et al v. Roadrunner Transportation Systems Inc et al
as 2:2017cv01209
Plaintiff:
Charles Michael Chapman and Cynthia B Chapman
Defendant:
Roadrunner Transportation Systems Inc and Roadrunner Intermodal Services LLC
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Estate of Timothy Gene Smith et al v. City of San Diego et al
as 3:2016cv02989
Plaintiff:
Estate of Timothy Gene Smith , Janie Richelle Sanders , Sandy Lynn Simmons and others
Defendant:
Shelley Zimmerman, Scott Holslag, Natalie Ann Macey and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Chapman et al v. Wells Fargo Bank NA et al
as 3:2016cv05482
Plaintiff:
Andrew B Chapman and Heather A Chapman
Defendant:
Wells Fargo Bank NA , Ginnie Mae and Directors Mortgage Inc.
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1640
Revis v. Diaz et al
as 1:2015cv00378
Plaintiff:
Audre L Revis
Defendant:
Ralph Diaz , S Sherman , B. Chapman and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441
Revis v. Diaz et al
as 1:2015at00190
Plaintiff:
Audre L Revis
Defendant:
Ralph Diaz , S Sherman , B. Chapman and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
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.
