Cases 1 - 10 of 14
Michael Bridgeman v. David Baughman
as 18-72263
Petitioner:
MICHAEL DAYNE BRIDGEMAN
Respondent:
DAVID BAUGHMAN
Bridgeman v. Hashemi
as 1:2016cv01399
Plaintiff:
Michael Dayne Bridgeman
Defendant:
Nastran Hashemi
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Bridgeman v. Dutton et al
as 3:2014cv02723
Petitioner:
Michael Dayne Bridgeman
Respondent:
James D. Dutton , People of the State of California and Sherman
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Bridgeman v. Attorney General of the State of California et al
as 3:2012cv00212
Petitioner:
Michael Dayne Bridgeman
Respondent:
Attorney General of the State of California and People of the State of California
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Michael Bridgeman v. The People of the State of CA, et al
as 12-70097
Petitioner:
MICHAEL DAYNE BRIDGEMAN
Respondent:
THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA, POTTIN, Officer #5854 and LEGRAND, Officer #6198
Bridgeman v. Education Department at RJ Donovan Correctional Facility et al
as 3:2011cv01098
Plaintiff:
Michael Dayne Bridgeman
Defendant:
Education Department at RJ Donovan Correctional Facility, George A Neotti and R Cobb
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Bridgeman v. Neotti et al
as 3:2011cv00526
Petitioner:
Michael Dayne Bridgeman
Respondent:
George A Neotti and RJ Donovan Correctional Facility
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Bridgeman v. Records Clerk et al
as 3:2011cv00390
Plaintiff:
Michael Dayne Bridgeman
Defendant:
Records Clerk, Trust Account Clerk and George A Neotti
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Bridgeman v. Smyth et al
as 3:2011cv00386
Petitioner:
Michael Dayne Bridgeman
Respondent:
Michael T Smyth and George A Neotti
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Bridgeman v. The People of the State of California et al
as 3:2011cv00388
Plaintiff:
Michael Dayne Bridgeman
Defendant:
The People of the State of California, Legrand and Pottin
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.
