Cases 21 - 30 of 94
Geray v. Shaffer
as 3:2020cv05383
Respondent:
Jennifer Shaffer
Petitioner:
Jason Geray
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
(PC) Victory v. Shaffer et al
as 1:2020cv00738
Plaintiff:
Michael A. Victory
Defendant:
Ralph Diaz, James Martin, Jennifer Shaffer and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
(PC) Rouser v. Lozano et al
as 2:2020cv01009
Defendant:
B. Holmes, Daniel Blake, John Springer and others
Plaintiff:
William Rouser
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
(PC) Andersen v. Shaffer
as 2:2020cv00999
Defendant:
Jennifer Shaffer
Plaintiff:
Andrew S. Andersen
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
(PC) Andersen v. Shaffer
as 1:2020cv00687
Defendant:
Jennifer Shaffer
Plaintiff:
Andrew S. Andersen
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Omar Gay v. Jennifer Shaffer, et al
as 20-15249
Defendant / Appellee:
KENNETH ALLEN, TIMOTHY O'HARA, JENNIFER SHAFFER, Secretary, Board of Parole Hearings and others
Plaintiff / Appellant:
OMAR SHARRIEFF GAY
(PC) Williams v. Newsom et al
as 2:2019cv02229
Defendant:
G. Bakerjian, Gavin Newsom and Jennifer Shaffer
Plaintiff:
Benny Williams
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Jason Geray v. Jennifer Shaffer, et al
as 19-17228
Defendant / Appellee:
RHONDA S. DOTTA, Parole Hearing Officer, JENNIFER SHAFFER, Director of Parole Hearings, SCOTT KERNAN, Secretary and others
Plaintiff / Appellant:
JASON GERAY
David Andrews v. B. Martinez, et al
as 19-17087
Defendant / Appellee:
C. HOYT, Correctional Officer, B. MARTINEZ, Correctional Counselor II, A. ANDERSON, Commissioner and others
Plaintiff / Appellant:
DAVID RAYMOND ANDREWS
Defendant:
C. CHRISTENSEN
Omar Gay v. Amy Parsons, et al
as 19-16662
Defendant / Appellant:
AMY PARSONS, Senior Psychologist and GREGORY S. GOLDSTEIN, Psychologist
Defendant:
CLIFF KUSAJ, Chief Psychologist and JENNIFER SHAFFER, Secretary, Board of Parole Hearings
Plaintiff / Appellee:
OMAR SHARRIEFF GAY
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.
