Cases 1 - 10 of 27
(HC) Singh v. Macomber
as 2:2024cv00881
Petitioner:
Raghvendra Singh
Respondent:
Jeff Macomber
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Singh v. Macomber
as 4:2023cv06303
Petitioner:
Raghvendra Singh
Respondent:
Jeff Macomber
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
(HC) Singh v. Macomber
as 2:2023cv02804
Petitioner:
Raghvendra Singh
Respondent:
Jeff Macomber
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
(HC) Singh v. People of California
as 2:2023cv02423
Petitioner:
Raghvendra Singh
Respondent:
People of California
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Raghvendra Singh v. USBC-SACIn re: Raghvendra Singh v. USBC-SAC
as 23-70126
Not Classified By Court:
In re: RAGHVENDRA SINGH and KIRAN RAWAT, Debtor
Petitioner:
RAGHVENDRA SINGH
Respondent:
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, SACRAMENTO
(PS) Singh v. Internal Revenue Service
as 2:2023cv00053
Plaintiff:
Raghvendra Singh
Defendant:
Internal Revenue Service
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
(PC) Singh v. Folsom State Prison
as 2:2023cv00058
Plaintiff:
Raj Singh and Raghvendra Singh
Defendant:
Folsom State Prison
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
(PS) Singh v. City of Elk Grove et al
as 2:2023cv00057
Plaintiff:
Raj Singh and Raghvendra Singh
Defendant:
City of Elk Grove, Trudau and Bobby Davis
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
(PS) Singh v. City of Elk Grove et al
as 2:2023cv00052
Plaintiff:
Raj Singh and Raghvendra Singh
Defendant:
City of Elk Grove, Jonathan Hobbs, Suzanne Kennedy and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
(PS) Singh v. City of Placerville et al
as 2:2023cv00054
Plaintiff:
Raj Singh and Raghvendra Singh
Defendant:
City of Placerville, Samuel Emerson and Mark S. Adams
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
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.
