Cases 61 - 70 of 79
Florez v. Schwarzenegger et al
as 3:2008cv00011
Plaintiff:
Armand Florez
Defendant:
Arnold Schwarzenegger, James E. Tilton, Scott Kernan and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Wilson v. Campbell
as 3:2007cv06136
Plaintiff:
Peter Wilson
Defendant:
Rosanne Campbell
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Bardo v. Tilton, et al
as 2:2007cv02558
Plaintiff:
Robert J. Bardo
Defendant:
Rosanne Campbell , Sylvia H. Garcia , K Rutherford and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Rodriguez v. Swarzenegger et al
as 2:2007cv02531
Plaintiff:
Luis Valenzuela Rodriguez
Defendant:
Arnold Swarzenegger, Mike Knowles, J. Woodford and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Hobson v. Campbel
as 3:2007cv05832
Petitioner:
Timothy Hobson
Respondent:
Rosanne Campbel
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Velez v. Woodford, et al.,
as 2:2007cv01802
Plaintiff:
Martin Velez
Defendant:
Jeanne Woodford, Rosanne Campbell and T. Shirley
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Morris v. Campbell et al
as 2:2007cv01771
Petitioner:
John H Morris
Respondent:
Rosanne Campbell, Panlli, George and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus
Johnson v. Campbell
as 3:2007cv02921
Petitioner:
La Merle Ronnie Johnson
Respondent:
Rosanne Campbell
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Esparza v. Campbell, et. al.
as 1:2007cv00556
Petitioner:
David Torres Esparza
Respondent:
Rosanne Campbell and Attorney General of the State of California
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Esparza v. Campbell, et. al.
as 2:2007cv00562
Petitioner:
David Torres Esparza
Respondent:
Rosanne Campbell and Attorney General of the State of California
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
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.
