Cases 11 - 20 of 660
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2024cv00168
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1681 Fair Credit Reporting Act
DURHAM v. STALLER et al
as 3:2024cv04033
Plaintiff:
TREMAYNE DURHAM
Defendant:
BRANDEN STALLER, MD AMY EMRICH, ANTHONY GANGI and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Iseli v. State of California et al
as 3:2024cv00523
Plaintiff:
Branden Willie Iseli
Defendant:
State of California, County of San Joaquin, United States District Court and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr Prisoner Civil Rights
Branden Holland v. J. Chavarria, et al
as 24-10804
Plaintiff:
BRANDEN HOLLAND
Defendant:
J. CHAVARRIA and J. BASSILLO
(HC) Iseli v. Lynch
as 2:2024cv00837
Petitioner:
Branden Willie Iseli
Respondent:
Jeff Lynch
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Iseli v. The State of California et. al.
as 3:2024cv00522
Plaintiff:
Branden Willie Iseli
Defendant:
The State of California and California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr Prisoner Civil Rights
(HC) Iseli v. Lynch
as 2:2024cv00821
Petitioner:
Branden Willie Iseli
Respondent:
Jeff Lynch
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
(PC) Iseli v. Lynch et al
as 2:2024cv00800
Plaintiff:
Branden Willie Iseli
Defendant:
Jeff Lynch and William D Johnson
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Justin Rumler v. Branden Myers, et al
as 24-1342
Plaintiff:
JUSTIN L. RUMLER
Defendant:
BRANDEN MYERS, Lt, of RHU/I.D.O.C., in their official and individual capacities, NICOLE WELLS, Sgt., of RHU I.D.O.C., in their official and individual capacities and FRED MOORE, Sgt of RHU/MCF/IDOC
(HC) Iseli v. Lynch
as 2:2024cv00681
Petitioner:
Branden Willie Iseli
Respondent:
Jeff Lynch
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.
