Cases 21 - 30 of 31
Elgin Trammell v. Robert Ambroselli
as 11-56106
Petitioner - Appellant:
ELGIN TRAMMELL
Respondent - Appellee:
ROBERT AMBROSELLI, Director of Adult Parole also known as California Department of Corrections
Leonardo Lyons v. Matthew Cate et al
as 2:2011cv04825
Respondent:
Robert Ambroselli and Matthew Cate
Petitioner:
Leonardo Lyons
Christopher Link Jones v. Matthew Cate et al
as 8:2011cv00577
Respondent:
Robert Ambroselli and Matthew Cate
Petitioner:
Christopher Link Jones
v. Dunkin et al
as 2:2010at01747
Defendant:
John Dunkin, California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation, Robert Ambroselli and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
Mbacke v. Dunkin et al.
as 2:2010cv03217
Defendant:
John M. Dunkin, California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation and Robert Ambroselli
Plaintiff:
Mamemor Mbacke
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
Mario Abernathy v. T Mendoza et al
as 8:2010cv00381
Plaintiff:
Mario Abernathy
Defendant:
Robert Ambroselli, Matthew Cate, Kenneth Ford and others
Mario Abernathy v. T Mendoza et al
as 8:2010cv00235
Petitioner:
Mario Abernathy
Respondent:
Robert Ambroselli, Matthew Cate, Kenneth Ford and others
Turner v. Cate et al
as 4:2010cv00560
Plaintiff:
Stephen B. Turner
Defendant:
Matthew Cate and Robert Ambroselli
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
John Armstrong, et al v. Arnold Schwarzenegger, et al
as 09-17632
Plaintiff - Appellee:
JOHN ARMSTRONG, JAMES AMAURIC, RICHARD PONCIANO and others
Defendant - Appellant:
ARNOLD SCHWARZENEGGER, MATTHEW CATE, BERNARD WARNER and others
John Armstrong, et al v. Arnold Schwarzenegger, et al
as 09-17144
Plaintiff - Appellee:
JOHN ARMSTRONG, JAMES AMAURIC, RICHARD PONCIANO and others
Defendant - Appellant:
ARNOLD SCHWARZENEGGER, MATTHEW CATE, BERNARD WARNER and others
Amicus Curiae:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
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.
