Cases 11 - 20 of 53
James Sams v. USDC-SAC
as 21-70121
Not Classified By Court:
RUBEN JIMENEZ, Correctional Lieutenant, In re: JAMES PLAS SAMS, L. SAMAYOA, Trust Office Official and others
Respondent:
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, SACRAMENTO
Petitioner:
JAMES PLAS SAMS
(PC)Martinez v. Diaz et al
as 2:2021cv00111
Defendant:
Anthony Carter, Kenneth J. Pogue, Landry and others
Plaintiff:
Javier Martinez
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Benny Carranza v. Ralph Diaz et al
as 5:2021cv00056
Defendant:
Anthony Carter, Kenneth J. Pogue, Ralph Diaz and others
Plaintiff:
Benny Carranza
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Peter Garcia v. Ralph Diaz
as 5:2020cv02564
Defendant:
Anthony Carter, Kenneth J. Pogue, Landry and others
Plaintiff:
Peter Garcia
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Ricardo Rubio v. Ralph Diaz et al
as 5:2020cv02541
Respondent:
Kenneth J. Pogue, Rossolio, Messerli and others
Petitioner:
Ricardo Rubio
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Austin Saenz v. Ralph Diaz et al
as 5:2020cv02542
Defendant:
Kenneth J. Pogue, Rossolio, Mr. Allen and others
Respondent:
Wright, --
Plaintiff:
Austin Saenz
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Anthony Perez v. Ralph Diaz, et al.
as 5:2020cv02508
Defendant:
Anthony Carter, Kenneth J. Pogue, Ralph Diaz and others
Plaintiff:
Anthony Perez and Anthony Alfred Perez
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Raul Perez v. Ralph Diaz et al
as 5:2020cv02509
Defendant:
Anthony Carter, Kenneth J. Pogue, Ralph Diaz and others
Plaintiff:
Raul Perez
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
(PC) Carranza v. Diaz et al
as 2:2020cv02394
Defendant:
Anthony Carter, Kenneth J. Pogue, Ralph Diaz and others
Plaintiff:
Benny Carranza
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Joaquin Lugo v. Ralph Diaz et al
as 5:2020cv02457
Defendant:
Anthony Carter, Kenneth J. Pogue, Landry and others
Plaintiff:
Joaquin Lugo
Cause Of Action: 42 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.
