Cases 31 - 40 of 49
Johnson v. Hill et al
as 2:2010cv02522
Plaintiff:
Vance Edward Johnson
Defendant:
Rick M. Hill, Jean E. Bracy, Janice Nelson and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Carmona v. Grannis et al
as 2:2010cv00898
Plaintiff:
Luis Carmona
Defendant:
N. Grannis, R. Pimentel, M. Martel and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Lemelle v. Walker et al
as 2:2010cv00870
Plaintiff:
Michael S Lemelle
Defendant:
James Walker, C. Haring, N. Grannis and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Carmona v. Grannis et al
as 5:2010cv00498
Plaintiff:
Luis Carmona
Defendant:
N. Grannis, R. Pimentel, M. Martel and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Martin v. Masuret et al
as 2:2010cv00189
Plaintiff:
Steven A. Martin
Defendant:
A. Masuret, E. Sanchez, T. Woods and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
White v. Ervin, Jr. et al
as 2:2009cv03475
Plaintiff:
Diwon White
Defendant:
D. Ervin, Jr., D. Harris, California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441 Petition for Removal- Civil Rights Act
White v. Ervin, Jr. et al
as 2:2009st02475
Plaintiff:
Diwon White
Defendant:
D. Ervin, Jr., D. Harris, California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441 Petition for Removal- Civil Rights Act
Williams v. Horel et al
as 3:2009cv05314
Plaintiff:
Michael Paul Williams
Defendant:
Robert A. Horel, M. A. Cook, Dayton N. Conover and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Edward Thomas v. CDC, et al
as 09-16330
Plaintiff - Appellant:
EDWARD LEE THOMAS
Defendant - Appellee:
CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, R. PIMENTEL, J. PAPPENFUS and others
Frank Fernandez v. Susan Risenhoover, et al
as 09-16279
Plaintiff - Appellant:
FRANK J. FERNANDEZ
Defendant - Appellee:
SUSAN RISENHOOVER, MICHAEL SAYRE, C. E. WILBER and others
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.
