Cases 21 - 30 of 52
Gutierrez v. Hill
as 3:2022cv01413
Petitioner:
Salvador Gutierrez
Respondent:
James Hill
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Quair III v. Hill
as 4:2022cv04692
Petitioner:
David Sabino Quair III
Respondent:
San Mateo Superior Court
Defendant:
James Hill
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus
Christopher Acly et al v. Ford Motor Company
as 2:2022cv05043
Plaintiff:
Christopher Acly, Tim Altaner, Hasan Altimimi and others
Defendant:
Ford Motor Company
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 2301 Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act
Carpio v. Hill
as 3:2022cv01037
Petitioner:
David Alexander Carpio
Respondent:
James Hill
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Lopez v. Hill et al
as 3:2022cv00888
Petitioner:
Henry Elvis Lopez
Respondent:
James Hill and Rob Bonta
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Gerald Ashford v. James Hill et al
as 5:2022cv00846
Plaintiff:
Gerald Ashford
Defendant:
James Hill, T. Lee, B. Castorena and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Akeem Rushard Coleman v. James Hill
as 2:2022cv01897
Petitioner:
Akeem Rushard Coleman
Respondent:
James Hill
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Ronnie Kevin Lowe v. Case Records Staff et al
as 5:2022cv00446
Plaintiff:
Ronnie Kevin Lowe
Defendant:
Case Records Staff and James Hill
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Henry C. Navarro v. James Hill
as 5:2022cv00285
Petitioner:
Henry C. Navarro
Respondent:
Connie Gipson and James Hill
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Lowe v. Case Records Staff et al
as 4:2022cv00683
Plaintiff:
Ronnie Kevin Lowe
Defendant:
Case Records Staff and James Hill
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
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.
