Cases 1 - 10 of 25
ROSALES et al v. ELIZABETH POLICE DEPARTMENT et al
as 2:2023cv01779
Plaintiff:
YAHARI ROSALES, MARGARITA TORRES, LISSY LANTIGUA-TORRES and others
Defendant:
ELIZABETH POLICE DEPARTMENT, ELIZABETH FIRE DEPARTMENT, OFFICER CHRISTIAN RONELLA and others
Cross Defendant:
CITY OF ELIZABETH and CHRISTIAN RONELLA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Federal Question: Other Civil Rights
Doe v. Ascension Seton-Luling et al
as 1:2022cv00654
Plaintiff:
Jane Doe
Defendant:
Ascension Seton-Luling, Luling Police Department and Officer Daniel Torres
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights
FILING ERROR
as 1:2022cv00653
Plaintiff:
Jane Doe
Defendant:
Ascension Seton-Luling, Luling Police Department and Luling Police Officer Daniel Torres
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2022cv00235
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1981 Civil Rights
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2021cv05038
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 12101
Puhr v. Canady et al
as 2:2021cv01858
Plaintiff:
Christopher Puhr
Defendant:
Roger Canady and Daniel Torres
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2021cv02765
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 12101
Tomelloso et al v. City of Vacaville et al
as 2:2021cv00507
Plaintiff:
Mary Tomelloso and Ruben H. Tomelloso
Defendant:
Daniel Torres, City of Vacaville and Nathan Benevides
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Sagan v. Hanover Park et al
as 1:2020cv00591
Defendant:
Gordon Hendry, Village of Hanover Park and Daniel Torres
Plaintiff:
Ben Sagan
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Torres v. Lucio et al
as 1:2019cv00039
Defendant:
G Santos, Noe Santibanez, Juan Moya and others
Plaintiff:
Daniel Torres
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
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.
