Cases 1 - 10 of 59
Pedro Rodriguez v. Arthur Anderson, et al
as 21-55672
Defendant / Appellee:
KEVIN CHAPPELL, Warden, Commissioner, individual and official capacity, W. MCCULLOUGH, Appeals Coordinator, individual and official capacity, CYNTHIA FRITZ, Commissioner, individual and official capacity and others
Plaintiff / Appellant:
PEDRO RODRIGUEZ
Steven Parks v. Kevin Chappell, et al
as 19-17526
Defendant:
CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS AND REHABILITATION
Defendant / Appellee:
KEVIN CHAPPELL, Warden
Plaintiff / Appellant:
STEVEN DEAN PARKS
Pedro Rodriguez v. Arthur Anderson, et al
as 19-56434
Defendant / Appellee:
RANDY GROUNDS, Warden, individual and official capacity, ALLI ZARRIN-NAM, Commissioner, individual and official capacity, CYNTHIA FRITZ, Commissioner, individual and official capacity and others
Plaintiff / Appellant:
PEDRO RODRIGUEZ, AKA Pedro Luis Rodriguez
Marcus Henderson v. Kevin Chappell
as 14-73227
Petitioner:
MARCUS LEE HENDERSON
Respondent:
KEVIN CHAPPELL, Warden
Jermaine Hunter v. Kevin Chappell
as 14-72903
Petitioner:
JERMAINE HUNTER
Respondent:
KEVIN CHAPPELL, Warden
Hieu Nguyen v. Kevin Chappell
as 14-72712
Petitioner:
HIEU TRUNG NGUYEN
Respondent:
KEVIN CHAPPELL, Warden
Darrell Lomax v. USDC-CALA
as 14-72455
:
In re: DARRELL LEE LOMAX
Petitioner:
DARRELL LEE LOMAX, AKA Malik Hasan
Respondent:
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, LOS ANGELES
Real Party In Interest:
KEVIN CHAPPELL, Warden
Walter Johnson v. Kevin Chappell
as 14-72353
Petitioner:
WALTER JOHNSON
Respondent:
KEVIN CHAPPELL, Warden
Velton Boone v. Kevin Chappell
as 14-72324
Petitioner:
VELTON LAMONT BOONE
Respondent:
KEVIN CHAPPELL, Warden
Randy Kraft v. USDC-CALA
as 14-72292
Petitioner:
RANDY STEVEN KRAFT
Respondent:
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, LOS ANGELES
Real Party In Interest:
KEVIN CHAPPELL, Warden
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.
