Cases 1 - 10 of 27
Sullivan v. County of Tehama et al
as 2:2023cv02351
Plaintiff:
Viola Sullivan
Defendant:
County of Tehama, Tehama County Sheriffs Office, Dave Kain and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Federal Question: Other Civil Rights
Marcia McHugh, et al v. County of Tehama, et al
as 22-15137
Plaintiff / Appellant:
MARCIA MCHUGH, Heir at Law and Successor in Interest to Joseph McHugh, Deceased and GRACE MCHUGH, Heir at Law and Successor in Interest to Joseph McHugh, Deceased
Defendant / Appellee:
COUNTY OF TEHAMA, TEHAMA COUNTY SHERIFFS' OFFICE, DAVE HENCRATT, Sheriff, in his individual and official capacity as Sheriff for the County of Tehama Sheriff Department and others
Defendant:
RANCHO TEHAMA ASSOCIATION, INC.
James Woods, Jr., et al v. County of Tehama, et al
as 22-15134
Plaintiff / Appellant:
JAMES WOODS, Jr. and JAMES WOODS, Sr.
Defendant / Appellee:
COUNTY OF TEHAMA, TEHAMA COUNTY SHERIFFS' OFFICE, DAVE HENCRATT, Sheriff, in his individual and official capacity as Sheriff for the County of Tehama Sheriff Department and others
Defendant:
RANCHO TEHAMA ASSOCIATION, INC.
Tiffany Phommathep, et al v. County of Tehama, et al
as 22-15132
Plaintiff / Appellant:
TIFFANY PHOMMATHEP, JOHN PHOMMATHEP, Sr., J. P., a minor, by and through his guardian ad litem Tiffany Phommathep and others
Defendant / Appellee:
COUNTY OF TEHAMA, TEHAMA COUNTY SHERIFFS' OFFICE, DAVE HENCRATT, Sheriff, in his individual and official capacity as Sheriff for the County of Tehama Sheriff Department and others
Defendant:
RANCHO TEHAMA ASSOCIATION, INC.
A. H. v. County of Tehama, et al
as 22-15133
Plaintiff / Appellant:
A. H., a Minor, by and through his guardian ad litem Maria Anjelica Monroy
Defendant / Appellee:
COUNTY OF TEHAMA, TEHAMA COUNTY SHERIFFS' OFFICE, DAVE HENCRATT, Sheriff, in his individual and official capacity as Sheriff for the County of Tehama Sheriff Department and others
Defendant:
RANCHO TEHAMA ASSOCIATION, INC.
Michael Elliott, et al v. County of Tehama, et al
as 22-15136
Plaintiff / Appellant:
MICHAEL ELLIOTT, Heir and Law and Successor in Interest to Daniel Lee Elliott II Deceased, and Diana Steele, Deceased, G. E., a Minor, by and through his Guardian ad Litem, Alma Feitelberg, Heir at Law and Successor in Interest to Daniel Lee Elliott II, Deceased, and Diana Steele, Deceased guardian ad litem Alma Feitelberg and M. E., a Minor, by and through her Guardian ad Litem, Latisha Cornwall, Heir at Law and Successor in Interest to Daniel Lee Elliott II, Deceased, and Diana Steele, Deceased guardian ad litem Latisha Cornwall
Defendant / Appellee:
COUNTY OF TEHAMA, TEHAMA COUNTY SHERIFFS' OFFICE, DAVE HENCRATT, Sheriff, in his individual and official capacity as Sheriff for the County of Tehama Sheriff Department and others
Defendant:
RANCHO TEHAMA ASSOCIATION, INC.
Troy McFadyen, et al v. County of Tehama, et al
as 22-15135
Plaintiff / Appellant:
TROY MCFADYEN, in his Individual Capacity, and as Heir at Law and Successor in Interest to Michelle McFadyen, Deceased, PHILLIP BOW, as Heir at Law and Successor in Interest to Michelle McFadyen, Deceased and SIA BOW, as Heir at Law and Successor in Interest to Michelle McFadyen, Deceased
Defendant / Appellee:
COUNTY OF TEHAMA, TEHAMA COUNTY SHERIFFS' OFFICE, DAVE HENCRATT, Sheriff, in his individual and official capacity as Sheriff for the County of Tehama Sheriff Department and others
Defendant:
RANCHO TEHAMA ASSOCIATION, INC.
(PS) Bowman v. County of Tehama et al
as 2:2021cv00225
Defendant:
Quintan Ortega, David Bowman, Ruben Murgia and others
Plaintiff:
Brian E. Bowman
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Human Rights Defense Center v. County of Tehama et al
as 2:2020at00165
Defendant:
Dave Hencratt and County of Tehama
Plaintiff:
Human Rights Defense Center
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Human Rights Defense Center v. County of Tehama et al
as 2:2020cv00359
Defendant:
Dave Hencratt and County of Tehama
Plaintiff:
Human Rights Defense Center
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.
