Cases 1 - 10 of 21
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 5:2022cv00089
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 12101 Americans With Disabilities Act
Michael Tulipat v. Secretary of the Navy, et al
as 20-71431
Respondent:
R. C. POWERS, BRADLEY J. GOODE, BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS and others
Petitioner:
MICHAEL A. TULIPAT
Henry C. Hayes v. California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation et al
as 2:2019cv09885
Defendant:
R. Clemons, Alan W. Cox, D. Ulstad and others
Plaintiff:
Henry C. Hayes
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Henry C. Hayes v. California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation et al
as 2:2019cv09513
Defendant:
R. Clemons, Alan W. Cox, D. Ulstad and others
Plaintiff:
Henry C. Hayes
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Farren Bryant v. Debbie Asuncion et al
as 2:2019cv06889
Defendant:
Correctional Officer H. Watson, Warden Debbie Asuncion, Sgt. R. Clemons and others
Plaintiff:
Farren Bryant, Jr.
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Hayes v. California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation et al
as 3:2019cv04107
Defendant:
R. Clemons, Alan W. Cox, D. Ulstad and others
Plaintiff:
Henry C Hayes and Henry C. Hayes
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
David James Pangborn v. Director of CDCR et al
as 2:2019cv02503
Plaintiff:
David James Pangborn
Defendant:
R. Clemons, Director of CDCR, K. Bradford and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Clemons v. Berryhill
as 2:2018cv00824
Defendant:
Nancy A. Berryhill
Plaintiff:
Wanda R. Clemons
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 205 Denial Social Security Benefits
Ciron B. Springfield v. Elwart et al
as 2:2017cv09123
Defendant:
T. Case, T. Case, R. Clemons and others
Plaintiff:
Ciron B Springfield
Clemons v. Colvin
as 2:2015cv00389
Plaintiff:
Wanda R. Clemons
Defendant:
Carolyn W. Colvin
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 205 Denial Social Security Benefits
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.
