Cases 11 - 20 of 96
Glover et al v. 3M Company et al
as 1:2022cv10261
Plaintiff:
Robert Glover, Jerome Givens, Cynthia Corona and others
Defendant:
3M Company (f/k/a Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing, Co), AGC Chemicals Americas Inc., Amerex Corporation and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1442 nr Notice of Removal
KRASIL v. BETZE et al
as 3:2022cv06914
Plaintiff:
EDWARD KRASIL
Defendant:
BRIAN BETZE, MOLLY AVERY, CURTIS WYERS and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
(PC) Ray v. Cates, et al.
as 1:2022cv01504
Plaintiff:
Edward Vincent Ray, Jr.
Defendant:
Brian Cates, Angel Ribera, Ralph Diaz and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Jennings v. Tyne
as 3:2022cv30072
Plaintiff:
Edward Vincent Jennings, Jr.
Defendant:
Jennifer Tyne
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Edward Ray, Jr. v. California Superior Court
as 22-15081
Plaintiff / Appellant:
EDWARD VINCENT RAY, Jr.
Defendant / Appellee:
CALIFORNIA SUPERIOR COURT
Edward Ray, Jr. v. William Sullivan, et al
as 21-16705
Plaintiff / Appellant:
EDWARD VINCENT RAY, Jr.
Defendant / Appellee:
WILLIAM JOE SULLIVAN, Warden, Warden at CCI, LEWIS, Sergeant at CCI, EATON, Corrections Sergeant at CCI and others
Edward Ray, Jr. v. S. Chefalo
as 21-15238
Defendant / Appellee:
S. CHEFALO, Sergeant at CCI
Plaintiff / Appellant:
EDWARD VINCENT RAY, Jr.
(PC) Ray v. Sullivan et al
as 1:2020cv01699
Defendant:
William Joe Sullivan, Medovitch, Lewis and others
Plaintiff:
Edward Vincent Ray, Jr.
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
(PC) Ray v. Chefalo
as 1:2020cv01515
Defendant:
S. Chefalo
Plaintiff:
Edward Vincent Ray, Jr.
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
(PC) Ray v. Hosey, et al.
as 1:2020cv01076
Defendant:
B. Cates, California Department of Correction and Rehabilitation, State of California and others
Plaintiff:
Edward Vincent Ray, Jr.
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.
