Cases 1 - 10 of 228
Hines v. Newsom et al
as 3:2023cv00308
Plaintiff:
James Lynn Hines
Defendant:
Gov. Gavin Newsom and Does 1 through 6
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 bv Bivens Non-Prisoner
James Lynn Hines v. State Of California et al
as 2:2022cv00925
Plaintiff:
James Lynn Hines
Defendant:
State Of California, Gov Doug Ducey, Gov Gavin Newsom and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question
Hines v. Newsom et al
as 3:2021cv00882
Defendant:
City Attorney, San Diego County Probation Dept., City of San Diego and others
Plaintiff:
James Lynn Hines
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 cv
Hines v. State of Calif.
as 3:2020cv02107
Defendant:
State of Calif.
Plaintiff:
James Lynn Hines
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 cv
Hines v. Calif Dept. of Corr and Rehab et al
as 3:2019cv00450
Defendant:
Jaffomo, Inc., Saff MD Inc (Beerman), Tatina Klmo and others
Plaintiff:
James Lynn Hines
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr
Hines v. Tatiana Kline & Assoc. et al
as 3:2019cv00126
Defendant:
Conrep Doctors Jaffms, Tatiana Kline & Assoc., Muuron Pelton and others
Plaintiff:
James Lynn Hines
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr
Hines v. Brown et al
as 3:2018cv02310
Defendant:
P4 Cop, SDPD Homicide, Pelton and others
Plaintiff:
James Lynn Hines
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr
Hines v. Internal Affairs et al
as 3:2018cv00849
Plaintiff:
James Lynn Hines
Defendant:
Internal Affairs, Edward Kenny Costrares, Sr., Mr. Jones and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Hines v. California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation et al
as 3:2017cv01013
Plaintiff:
James Lynn Hines
Defendant:
California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation, Greg Pico, Maureen Pelton and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Hines v. Hissong et al
as 3:2017cv00477
Plaintiff:
James Lynn Hines
Defendant:
Larry Hissong, Jim Howie, Martinez and others
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.
