Cases 11 - 20 of 22
Jacobs v. Behlig et al
as 3:2011cv03155
Plaintiff:
Jerome Jacobs
Defendant:
Behlig, Security Therapist Aide, . Davidson and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Jerome Jacobs v. Chad Oberhausen, et al
as 11-1802
Plaintiff - Appellant:
JEROME JACOBS
Defendant - Appellee:
CHAD OBERHAUSEN, Doctor, Primary Therapist/Team Leader, SHARLENE CARAWAY, Associate Clinical Director, JOHN & JANE DOES, STA I's/II's/IV's and others
Jerome Jacobs v. Eugene McAdory, et al
as 11-1803
Plaintiff - Appellant:
JEROME JACOBS
Defendant - Appellee:
EUGENE MCADORY, Executive II Security Director, LARRY J. PHILLIPS, Program/Facility Director and JOHN & JANE DOES, Shift commander
Shannon Jacobs v. Jeanne Woodford
as 10-73769
Petitioner:
SHANNON JEROME JACOBS
Respondent:
JEANNE WOODFORD, Warden
Shannon Jacobs v. Standing Director of CDCR
as 09-55872
Petitioner - Appellant:
SHANNON JEROME JACOBS
Respondent - Appellee:
STANDING DIRECTOR OF CDCR
Jacobs
as 3:2009cv03140
Plaintiff:
Jerome Jacobs
Defendant:
Chad Oberhausen, S Caraway, John/Jane Does and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Jacobs v. McAdory et al
as 3:2009cv03138
Plaintiff:
Jerome Jacobs
Defendant:
Eugene McAdory, Larry Phillips and John/Jane Does
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
JACOBS v. BELMONT INDUSTRIES, INC. et al
as 2:2009cv68035
Plaintiff:
JEROME JACOBS
Defendant:
BELMONT INDUSTRIES, INC., A.L. CRUMP AND CO., INC. , M.H. DETRICH CO., INC. and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
JACOBS v. A.H. BENNETT COMPANY et al
as 2:2009cv66639
Plaintiff:
JEROME JACOBS
Defendant:
A.H. BENNETT COMPANY, A.P. GREEN INDUSTRIES, INC., A.P. GREEN INDUSTRIES, INC. and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Asbestos Litigation
Shannon Jacobs v. Standing Director of CDCR
as 09-70381
Petitioner:
SHANNON JEROME JACOBS
Respondent:
STANDING DIRECTOR OF CDCR
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.
