Cases 1 - 10 of 10
Bilal Ahdom v. C. Etchebehere, et al
as 17-17525
Plaintiff - Appellant:
BILAL AHDOM
Defendant - Appellee:
C. ETCHEBEHERE, F. COTE and CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS AND REHABILITATION
Bilal Ahdom v. S. Lopez, et al
as 16-16831
Plaintiff - Appellant:
BILAL AHDOM
Defendant - Appellee:
S. LOPEZ, Chief Medical Officer at Kern Valley State Prison, M. ARAICH, Nurse Practitioner at Kern Valley State Prison, S. SCHAEFER, Physician at Kern Valley State Prison and others
Bilal Ahdom v. S. Lopez, et al
as 14-16334
Plaintiff - Appellant:
BILAL AHDOM
Defendant - Appellee:
S. LOPEZ, Chief Medical Officer at Kern Valley State Prison, M. ARAICH, Nurse Practitioner at Kern Valley State Prison, S. SCHAEFER, Physician at Kern Valley State Prison and others
Bilal Ahdom v. Matthew Cate, et al
as 13-17200
Plaintiff - Appellant:
BILAL AHDOM
Defendant - Appellee:
MATTHEW CATE and K. ALLISON
Ahdom v. Etchebehere et al
as 1:2013cv01623
Plaintiff:
Bilal Ahdom
Defendant:
C. Etchebehere, F. Cote and California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Ahdom v. Cate et al
as 1:2011cv01730
Plaintiff:
Bilal Ahdom
Defendant:
Matthew Cate and K. Allison
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Bilal Ahdom v. People of the State of Califor
as 11-71568
Petitioner:
BILAL AHDOM
Respondent:
PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
Bilal Ahdom v. Dr. Enenmoh, et al
as 11-15859
Plaintiff - Appellant:
BILAL AHDOM
Defendant - Appellee:
DR. ENENMOH, Chief Medical Officer, GAIL MARTINEZ, Health Care Manager, J. METTS, Medical Doctor and others
Ahdom v. Enenmoh et al
as 1:2010cv00816
Plaintiff:
Bilal Ahdom
Defendant:
Enenmoh, Gail Martinez, J. Metts and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Ahdom v. Lopez et al
as 1:2009cv01874
Plaintiff:
Bilal Ahdom
Defendant:
S. Lopez, M. Rashidi, M. Araich and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
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.
