Cases 1 - 10 of 16
Cornel Jackson v. County of Madera, et al
as 22-16920
Plaintiff / Appellant:
CORNEL JACKSON
Defendant / Appellee:
COUNTY OF MADERA, a Municipality of the State of California, BRETT FRAZIER, DAVID ROGERS and others
Jackson v. County of Madera, et al.
as 1:2022cv00069
Plaintiff:
Cornel Jackson
Defendant:
County of Madera, Brett Frazier, David Rogers and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
G and G Closed Circuit Events, LLC v. Evangelina E. Alvarez
as 2:2020cv04041
Defendant:
Evangelina E. Alvarez and Evangelina E. Alvarez individually doing business as El Salon Juarez
Plaintiff:
G & G Closed Circuit Events, LLC and G and G Closed Circuit Events, LLC
Cause Of Action: 47 U.S.C. § 521
David Florence v. A. Benrostrol, et al
as 19-56079
Defendant / Appellee:
L. WARD, C/O, J. RAMIREZ, CCII - Appeals Coordinatror A/C, A. LAROCCO, C/O and others
Plaintiff / Appellant:
DAVID FLORENCE
Florence v. Benrostrol et al
as 3:2019cv00446
Defendant:
M. Martin, A. Silva, J. Thompson and others
Plaintiff:
David Florence
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr
Garcia v. Kernan et al
as 3:2018cv02313
Plaintiff:
Felipe Garcia
Defendant:
E. Alvarez, P. Bracamonte, M Villa Fuerte and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr
A&C Trade Consultants, Inc. v. Alvarez, et al.
as 3:2018cv05356
Defendant:
Suministros Industriales Joma S.A.S., Martin Alonso Guerra Espinosa, Joel E Alvarez and others
Plaintiff:
A&C Trade Consultants, Inc.
White v. Strayhorn et al
as 3:2014cv01665
Plaintiff:
Toney A. White, III
Defendant:
D. Strayhorn, J. Cariman, Daniel Paramo and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Rios v. Paramo et al
as 3:2014cv01073
Plaintiff:
Carlos Rios
Defendant:
Daniel Paramo, J. Behra, E. Benyard and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2014cv00027
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
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.
