Cases 1 - 10 of 267
Cruz v. Oliver, et al.
as 24-3013
Petitioner:
CARIM CRUZ
Respondent:
RONALD OLIVER, Substituted in Place of William Hutching per [40] Order., ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF NEVADA and WILLIAM HUTCHINGS, Substituted by Ronald Oliver per [40] Order.
Oliver v. Campbell
as 24-2696
Petitioner:
ANTHONY C. OLIVER
Respondent:
TAMMY L. CAMPBELL, Warden of California State Prison, Corcoran
Olvera Cazares, et al. v. Garland
as 24-2370
Petitioner:
YUNNUEN CITLALLY OLVERA CAZARES, OLIVER REYES OLVERA and SHELBY REYES OLVERA
Respondent:
MERRICK B. GARLAND, ATTORNEY GENERAL
Stewart v. Oliver, et al.
as 24-2168
Petitioner:
TOMMY LAQUADE STEWART
Respondent:
RONALD OLIVER, GABRIELA NAJERA and ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF NEVADA
Milgrim v. Garcia, et al.
as 24-1836
Plaintiff:
JARED RYAN MILGRIM, an individual
Defendant:
ALFREDO GARCIA, an individual, KIRAN KAMAT, an individual, ELAIN LEVY, an individual and others
Keene, et al. v. City and County of San Francisco, et al.
as 24-1574
Plaintiff:
SELINA KEENE, MARK MCCLURE, MELODY FOUNTILA and others
Defendant:
CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO, LONDON BREED, CAROL ISEN and others
Reyes-Robles, et al. v. Garland
as 24-1378
Petitioner:
ALONDRA REYES-ROBLES, RIGOBERTO MARTINEZ-GRANDE, EITHAN RIGOBERTO MARTINEZ-REYES and others
Respondent:
MERRICK B. GARLAND, ATTORNEY GENERAL
Smith v. Howell, et al.
as 24-857
Petitioner:
CHRISTOPHER O. SMITH
Respondent:
JERRY HOWELL, ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF NEVADA and RONALD OLIVER, Substituted per [92] Order for Jerry Howell
McNeal v. Oliver, et al.
as 24-474
Petitioner / Appellant:
MARCUS SHARIF MCNEAL
Respondent / Appellee:
RONALD OLIVER and ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF NEVADA
Oliver v. EHM Productions Inc., et al.
as 24-324
Plaintiff / Appellant:
ANTHONY OLIVER
Defendant / Appellee:
EHM PRODUCTIONS INC., AABACO SMALL BUSINESS, LLC, DOTDASH MEDIA, INC. 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.
