Cases 1 - 5 of 5
Wendy Gish, et al v. Gavin Newsom, et al
as 20-56324
Defendant / Appellee:
ROBERT LOVINGGOOD, in his official capacity as a San Bernardino County Supervisor, KAREN SPIEGEL, in her official capacity as a Riverside County Supervisor, JANICE RUTHERFORD, in her official capacity as a San Bernardino County Supervisor and others
Plaintiff / Appellant:
BRENDA WOOD, WENDY GISH, PATRICK SCALES and others
Wendy Gish, et al v. Gavin Newsom, et al
as 20-55445
Defendant / Appellee:
ROBERT LOVINGGOOD, in his official capacity as a San Bernardino County Supervisor, KAREN SPIEGEL, in her official capacity as a Riverside County Supervisor, JANICE RUTHERFORD, in her official capacity as a San Bernardino County Supervisor and others
Plaintiff / Appellant:
BRENDA WOOD, WENDY GISH, PATRICK SCALES and others
Amicus Curiae:
AMERICANS UNITED FOR SEPARATION OF CHURCH AND STATE, BEND THE ARC: A JEWISH PARTNERSHIP FOR JUSTICE, CENTRAL CONFERENCE OF AMERICAN RABBIS; INTERFAITH ALLIANCE FOUNDATION; MEN OF REFORM JUDAISM; NATIONAL COUNCIL OF THE CHURCHES OF CHRIST IN THE USA; RECONSTRUCTING JUDAISM; RECONSTRUCTIONIST RABBINICAL and FREEDOM FROM RELIGION FOUNDATION
David Roberts v. Riverside County Supervisor, et al
as 16-56653
Plaintiff - Appellant:
DAVID LEE ROBERTS
Respondent - Appellee:
RIVERSIDE COUNTY SUPERVISOR, CHARLES MORGAN, County Superior Court Judge and JOHN H. AQUILINA, Public Defender
Defendant - Appellee:
MICHEAL RUSTON, Deputy District Attorney
David Lee Roberts v. Riverside County Supervisor et al
as 5:2016cv01777
Respondent:
John H. Aquilina, Charles Morgan, Riverside County Supervisor and others
Plaintiff:
David Lee Roberts
Roberts v. Riverside County Supervisor et al
as 3:2016cv02060
Plaintiff:
David Lee Roberts
Defendant:
Riverside County Supervisor, Charles Morgan, John H. Aquilina and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. ยง 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.
