Cases 11 - 20 of 5,676
(PC) Bonilla v. Mendez et al
as 2:2024cv01214
Plaintiff:
Steven Wayne Bonilla, VEXATIOUS LITIGANT
Defendant:
John A. Mendez
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Das v. Medvin, et al
as 3:2024cv02477
Plaintiff:
Damodar Chandra Das
Defendant:
John Doe and Newman
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Canady v. Figuera et al
as 3:2024cv00752
Plaintiff:
John Fitzgerald Canady
Defendant:
Ivan Figuera, Paola Castro, Shelly Amador and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr Prisoner Civil Rights
Daniel Kauwe v. Nicole Caceres et al
as 8:2024cv00855
Plaintiff:
Daniel Kauwe
Defendant:
Nicole Caceres, Stacey Berardino, Clayton Chau and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Battise Collins v. L. Lundy et al
as 2:2024cv03210
Plaintiff:
Battise Collins
Defendant:
L. Lundy, Swain and John Doe No. 1
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
(HC) Rogers v. CDCR et al
as 2:2024cv01150
Petitioner:
John William Rogers
Respondent:
San Joaquin Superior Court and CDCR
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Jalaal Abdullah v. Kelly Santoro et al
as 2:2024cv03139
Plaintiff:
Jalaal Ibn Abdullah
Defendant:
Kelly Santoro, John or Jane Doe, K. Mixon and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
John Fay v. L.A. County Sheriffs Dept.
as 2:2024cv02974
Plaintiff:
John Fay
Defendant:
L.A. County Sheriffs Dept.
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Randle v. Fregi et al
as 3:2024cv02098
Plaintiff:
Ramello Randle
Defendant:
Matthew Fregi and John Kennedy
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
(PC) Holliday v. Madera County Sheriff Office Jail Division
as 1:2024cv00416
Plaintiff:
John Anthony Holliday
Defendant:
Madera County Sheriff Office Jail Division
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.
