Cases 1 - 10 of 17
ATKINSON v. APODACA
as 1:2023cv00142
Plaintiff:
MICHAEL ATKINSON
Defendant:
CAPTAIN APODACA, CORRECTIONAL OFFICER HILDERBAND, CORRECTIONAL OFFICER BAUER and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights
Apodaca v. NewRez LLC
as 2:2023cv01180
Plaintiff:
Bryan Apodaca
Defendant:
NEWREZ LLC doing business as Shelloint Mortgage Servicing doing business as Newrez Mortgage
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Breach of Contract
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 5:2023cv01173
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 12101 The Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990
SIDES v. FISCUS HEARING EXAMINER et al
as 1:2021cv00249
Plaintiff:
ANTHONY SIDES
Defendant:
FISCUS HEARING EXAMINER, OBERLANDER, R. ADAMS and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr
EASLEY v. WETZEL et al
as 1:2021cv00063
Plaintiff:
WAYNE EASLEY and WARREN EASLEY
Defendant:
MONGILUZZO, JOHN BLICHA, JOHN WETZEL and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr
EASLEY v. OBERLANDER et al
as 1:2020cv00156
Plaintiff:
WARREN EASLEY
Defendant:
JOHN VETZEL, ERNIE MANGELUZZO, DR. WRIGHT and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
EASLEY v. OPERLANDER et al
as 1:2020cv00151
Defendant:
JOHN WETZEL, TABE BICKELL, DR. WRIGHT and others
Plaintiff:
WARREN EASLEY
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr
VICTOR v. OVERMYER et al
as 1:2018cv00366
Plaintiff:
WILLIAM VICTOR
Defendant:
COUNSELOR HOPKINS, LT. WALKER, JOHN DOE and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr
QADR v. COLEMAN et al
as 2:2014cv01443
Plaintiff:
NUR QADR
Defendant:
BRIAN V. COLEMAN, STEVEN GATES, TAMMY CESERINO and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
RICHARDSON v. BURNS et al
as 1:2013cv00110
Petitioner:
ERIC RICHARDSON
Respondent:
DANIEL P. BURNS, APODACA, ROBERT REED and others
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.
