Cases 11 - 20 of 25
Armando Aros v. Charles Ryan, et al
as 13-16242
Plaintiff - Appellant:
ARMANDO ROBERTO AROS
Defendant - Appellee:
CHARLES L. RYAN, Director, GEORGE HERMAN, STGVC Chairperson, JEFFREY FREELAND, Deputy Warden and others
Armando Aros v. Charles Ryan, et al
as 13-16082
Plaintiff - Appellant:
ARMANDO ROBERTO AROS
Defendant - Appellee:
CHARLES L. RYAN, Director, GEORGE HERMAN, STGVC Chairperson, JEFFREY FREELAND, Deputy Warden and others
Heet v. Ethicon, Inc. et al
as 2:2013cv04575
Plaintiff:
Sara Heet
Defendant:
Ethicon, Inc. and Johnson & Johnson
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Product Liability
Skinner #193387 v. Ryan et al
as 2:2012cv01729
Plaintiff:
James E Skinner
Defendant:
Charles L Ryan, Ron Credio, Lance Hefner and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Dini #140699 v. Ryan et al
as 2:2012cv01486
Plaintiff:
Francisco DeWayne Dini
Defendant:
Charles L Ryan, S Childs, Unknown Miser and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Aros #95001 v. Ryan et al
as 2:2011cv02565
Defendant:
Unknown Harris, Unknown Cardenas, Unknown Velasco and others
Plaintiff:
Armando Roberto Aros
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Nordstrom v. Ryan et al
as 2:2011cv02344
Plaintiff:
Scott Douglas Nordstrom
Defendant:
Charles L Ryan, Ernest Trujillo, A Ramos and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Pember # 067165 v. Ryan et al
as 2:2011cv02332
Plaintiff:
Jay Lynn Pember
Defendant:
Charles L Ryan, Unknown Ramos, Unknown Barrios and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Isbell v. Ryan et al
as 2:2011cv00391
Plaintiff:
William Mark Isbell
Defendant:
Charles L Ryan, Alfred Ramos, Jack Heet and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Levine v. Monzano et al
as 2:2010cv01946
Plaintiff:
Paul A Levine
Defendant:
Unknown Monzano, Debby Diaz, Unknown McWilliams and others
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.
