Cases 1 - 10 of 19
David Cramer v. Warden Jenkins et al
as 2:2023cv04659
Plaintiff:
David Cramer and David Anthony Cramer
Defendant:
Warden Jenkins, Captain Sieja, Lieutenant Kaleta and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Bryan Booren, et al v. AELP Securitization Trust Seri, et al
as 21-35323
Defendant / Appellee:
MERSCORP HOLDINGS, INC., FAY SERVICING, LLC, MB LAW GROUP LLP and others
Plaintiff / Appellant:
BRYAN BOOREN and SHARIN R. METCALF
Booren et al v. MB Law Group LLP et al
as 3:2020cv06163
Plaintiff:
Sharin R Metcalf and Bryan Booren
Defendant:
Zeive Brodnax & Steele LLP, AELP Securitization Trust Series 2015-1, David Cramer and others
Cause Of Action: 21 U.S.C. § 881
David Cramer v. Superior Court of California
as 16-73832
:
In re: DAVID CRAMER
Petitioner:
DAVID CRAMER
Respondent:
SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA, PLACER COUNTY
Real Party In Interest:
JULIE BELAND
Cramer #124771 v. Arizona, State of et al
as 2:2016cv03522
Respondent:
Attorney General of the State of Arizona and Charles L Ryan
Petitioner:
David Cramer
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Cramer #124771 v. Walgreens Pharmacy
as 2:2016cv03208
Plaintiff:
David Cramer
Defendant:
Walgreens Pharmacy
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Cramer v. People of the State of CA
as 2:2016cv00083
Petitioner:
David Cramer
Respondent:
People of the State of California
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Cramer v. People of the State of California
as 2:2015cv02506
Petitioner:
David Cramer
Respondent:
People of the State of California
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Cramer v. City of Auburn et al
as 2:2015cv00462
Plaintiff:
David Cramer
Defendant:
City of Auburn, Julie Beland, Michael Bailey and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1981
Cramer v. Arizona, State of
as 2:2013cv00763
Respondent:
Arizona, State of
Petitioner:
David Cramer
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.
