Cases 1 - 10 of 11
Jones v. Adams, et al.
as 1:2012cv01432
Defendant:
William Adams , E. Borrero , Belinda Gricewich and others
Plaintiff:
Jason Earl Jones
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Jones v. Adams et al
as 1:2012at00570
Defendant:
William Adams , E. Borrero , Belinda Gricewich and others
Plaintiff:
Jason Earl Jones
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Jason Jones et al v. State of California et al
as 1:2011cv02104
Plaintiff:
Jason Earl Jones and Jones Capital Trust
Defendant:
State of California, California Correctional Peace Officers Association, California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Jones v. Harrington
as 1:2010cv00212
Petitioner:
Jason Earl Jones
Respondent:
Kelly Harrington
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Jones v. Cate
as 1:2009cv00563
Petitioner:
Jason Earl Jones
Respondent:
Matthew Cate
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Jones v. Cate
as 2:2009cv00370
Petitioner:
Jason Earl Jones
Respondent:
Matthew Cate
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Jason Earl Jones v. Walt Karpinski et al
as 2:2008cv08495
Petitioner:
Jason Earl Jones
Defendant:
Walt Karpinski and County of Los Angeles
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Forma Pauperis Denial
Jones v. Karpinski et al
as 2:2008cv03055
Petitioner:
Jason Earl Jones
Defendant:
Walt Karpinski and County of Los Angeles
Cause Of Action: Federal Question
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2008cv04321
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: Federal Question
Jones v. California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation et al
as 1:2007cv01852
Plaintiff:
Jason Earl Jones
Defendant:
California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation, James Tilton, Kern Valley State Prison and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
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.
