Cases 81 - 90 of 532
Davis, Paris v. Dr. Murphy et al
as 3:2022cv00203
Plaintiff:
Paris Davis
Defendant:
Dr. Murphy and HSUS Man Adams
Not Classified By Court:
WSPF Prison Facility
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Campbell v. Department of Corrections et al
as 2:2022cv00392
Plaintiff:
Jayson Jay Campbell
Defendant:
Department of Corrections and HSU Staff
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Hsu v. Garland
as 22-550
Petitioner:
LISA CHING FEI HSU
Respondent:
MERRICK B. GARLAND, ATTORNEY GENERAL
Winston v. Gilbert et al
as 2:2022cv00358
Plaintiff:
Thomas T Winston
Defendant:
Frederick B Gilbert, HSU Manager Vasquez, B Banach and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Smith et al v. Warden et al
as 2:2022cv00330
Plaintiff:
Osuntoka Smith, Andre D Hansbrough, Toney Davis and others
Defendant:
Warden, D Blackburn, Justin Segerstrom and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
May, Edith v. Hassan, Fatah et al
as 3:2022cv00129
Plaintiff:
Edith M May and Edith M. May
Defendant:
Fatah Hassan, (HSU) Health Services Unit, HSU Manager Radcliff and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Hsu v. Wells Fargo Bank, National Association
as 3:2022mc80062
Petitioner:
Yuan Hsu
Respondent:
Wells Fargo Bank, National Association
BOU JABBOUR et al v. BLINKEN et al
as 1:2022cv00451
Plaintiff:
PAUL BOU JABBOUR, RAMESH ADHIKARI, SUREN AKHVERDYAN and others
Defendant:
ANTHONY BLINKEN, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE, AMERICAN INSTITUTE IN TAIWAN and others
Cause Of Action: 05 U.S.C. § 0706 Judicial Review of Agency Actions
Reveles, Michael v. Carr, K. et al
as 3:2022cv00090
Plaintiff:
Michael M. Reveles
Defendant:
K. A. Carr, Warden Tegels, Dep. Warden Buesgen and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2022cv00566
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 623
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.
