Cases 1 - 9 of 9
Bonilla v. Chhabria et al
as 4:2023cv04540
Plaintiff:
Steven Wayne Bonilla
Defendant:
Judge Vince Chhabria, Chief Judge Richard Seeborg, Judge Joseph C. Spero and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 4:2022cv04971
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Raiser v. United States District Court for the Southern District of California et al
as 3:2019cv01571
Defendant:
All Non-Judicial Staff of this Court, Chief Judge Larry Burns, United States District Court for the Southern District of California and others
Plaintiff:
Aaron Raiser
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2201 dj
Salma Agha-Khan, MD v. United States of America et al
as 2:2017cv03186
Defendant:
Kirk Edward Sherriff, Debbie Banducci, Barry L Goldner and others
Plaintiff:
Salma Agha-Khan
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
In re Letter to U.S. District Judge, Chief Judge
as 2:2017mc00027
Plaintiff:
Cynthia Marie Kain
In Re:
Letter to U.S. District Judge, Chief Judge
Knighton v. Cedarville Rancheria of Northern Paiute Indians et al
as 2:2016at01274
Plaintiff:
Dianna Knighton
Defendant:
Cedarville Rancheria of Northern Paiute Indians, Cedarville Rancheria Tribal Court and Patricia R. Lenzi, in her capacity as Chief Judge of the Cedarville Rancheria Tribal Court
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
DANIEL DAVID DYDZAK v. ARNOLD SCHWARZENEGGER et al
as 2:2012cv08759
Defendant:
1ST CENTURY BANCSHARES, INC., 1ST CENTURY BANK, MICHAEL BRUCE ABELSON and others
Plaintiff:
Daniel David Dydzak
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2011cv01046
Petitioner:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Respondent:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1651
Carlos Franklin Bell v. Alex Kozinsky et al
as 2:2011cv00153
Defendant:
AO Fed Ct, AQMD, ARB and others
Plaintiff:
Carlos Franklin Bell
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.
