Cases 21 - 30 of 144
Columbus Allen, Jr. v. Scott Kernan, et al
as 18-55718
Plaintiff - Appellant:
COLUMBUS ALLEN, Jr.
Defendant - Appellee:
SCOTT KERNAN, CDCR Secretary, M. VOONG, Chief, R. BRIGGS, Appeals Examiner and others
Tony Roberts v. J. Beard, et al
as 17-56830
Plaintiff - Appellant:
TONY ANTHONY ROBERTS, AKA Tony Roberts
Defendant - Appellee:
J. BEARD, Secretary of CDCR, DANIEL PARAMO, Warden, KIMBERLY A. SEIBEL, Warden and others
Columbus Allen, Jr. v. Scott Kernan, et al
as 17-56655
Plaintiff - Appellant:
COLUMBUS ALLEN, Jr.
Defendant - Appellee:
SCOTT KERNAN, CDCR Secretary, M. VOONG, Chief, R. BRIGGS, Appeals Examiner and others
Lawrence Petitta v. D. Paramo, et al
as 17-17046
Petitioner - Appellant:
LAWRENCE J. PETITTA
Respondent - Appellee:
D. PARAMO and J. BEARD
Green v. Beard et al
as 1:2017at00589
Plaintiff:
Lance Green
Defendant:
J Beard , J Brown , M Cate and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Green v. Beard et al
as 1:2017cv01027
Plaintiff:
Lance Green
Defendant:
J Beard , J Brown , M Cate and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Hernandez v. Schaad et al
as 4:2017cv04055
Plaintiff:
Joseph Hernandez
Defendant:
A. Schaad, Williams, Lomheim and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
John Hardney v. L. Moncus, et al
as 17-16368
Plaintiff - Appellant:
JOHN FREDERICK HARDNEY
Defendant - Appellee:
L. MONCUS, Correctional Officer, Mule Creek State Prison, J. MOECKLY, Correctional Lieutenant, Mule Creek State Prison, J. LIZARRAGA, Warden, Mule Creek State Prison and others
Toby Semick v. CDCR, et al
as 17-16090
Plaintiff - Appellant:
TOBY M SEMICK
Defendant - Appellee:
CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS AND REHABILITATION, J. BEARD, M. VOONG and others
Petitta v. Paramo et al
as 5:2017cv02996
Petitioner:
Lawrence J Petitta
Respondent:
D. Paramo and J. Beard
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.
