Cases 31 - 40 of 2,454
Cardwell v. Roundtree et al
as 1:2024cv00041
Plaintiff:
Duval F. Cardwell
Defendant:
Sheriff Richard Roundtree, Major Mitchell, Major Rawlings and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
(PC) Gallegos v. Newsom et al
as 2:2024cv01004
Plaintiff:
Benjamin Robert Gallegos
Defendant:
Gavin Newsom and Jeff McComber
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
(PC) Valles v. Newsom et al
as 1:2024cv00379
Plaintiff:
Frank Valles
Defendant:
Galvin Newsom, State Water Resources Control Board, Martin Gamboa and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Warick v. Newsome et al
as 7:2024cv00029
Plaintiff:
Gary Warick
Defendant:
Dusty Newsome, Mr. Symshack, John Hunt and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Newsome v. 4H Construction Services, LLC et al
as 1:2024cv01328
Plaintiff:
Angela Newsome
Defendant:
4H Construction Services, LLC, Keith Porter Home Insulating, Inc., SWD Urethane and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Personal Injury
John Newsome v. Reginald Floyd
as 24-6283
Plaintiff:
JOHN RICHARD NEWSOME
Defendant:
REGINALD FLOYD, K. JEFFORDS and C. SPAZIANI
Newsome v. International Paper
as 24-20126
Plaintiff:
Jarrod Newsome
Defendant:
International Paper Company
Hill v. United States District Court for the Eastern District of California, Sacramento
as 24-1583
Petitioner:
NATHAN HILL
Respondent:
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, SACRAMENTO
Interested Party:
GAVIN NEWSOM, RALPH DIAZ, Director of CDCR, KEN CLARK, Warden of CSP-Corcoran and others
Cuyler v. Wilson et al
as 8:2024cv00660
Plaintiff:
James M. Cuyler
Defendant:
Charles R. Wilson, William H. Pryor, Jr., Adalberto Jordan and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Newsome v. Kroger Texas LP
as 4:2024cv00230
Plaintiff:
Anna Newsome
Defendant:
Kroger Texas LP
Other:
ADR Provider
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-(Citizenship)
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.
