Cases 1 - 10 of 100
Rodgers v. Cabral
as 4:2026cv01172
Plaintiff:
Jeremy DeWayne Rodgers
Defendant:
Police Officer Jonathan Cabral
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Henderson v. Kumar et al
as 5:2026cv07662
Plaintiff:
Johndell Henderson
Defendant:
Reetika K. Kumar, Salim Elhabaly, Jamaal Rodgers and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Robinson v. Rodgers
as 3:2026cv00695
Plaintiff:
Chase Robinson
Defendant:
Officer Rodgers
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Adame, et al. v. National Steel and Shipbuilding Company
as 26-4553
Respondent:
MYRNA ADAME, SIDNEY AGUILAR, JASON ALBERT and others
Petitioner:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA and NATIONAL STEEL AND SHIPBUILDING COMPANY
Goeckeritz v. Department of Commerce
as 2:2026cv00676
Plaintiff:
Rodger Goeckeritz
Defendant:
Department of Commerce
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Goeckeritz v. City of Draper et al
as 2:2026cv00669
Plaintiff:
Rodger Goeckeritz
Defendant:
City of Draper, Draper Police Department, Rich Ferguson and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Cannon v. Pate et al
as 5:2026ct03210
Plaintiff:
Kendrick Cannon
Defendant:
Imelda Pate, Kimberly Benton, Ryan Herrel and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
DDBD, LLC v. Providence Enterprise LLC et al
as 3:2026cv00980
Plaintiff:
DDBD, LLC
Defendant:
Providence Enterprise LLC and Henry Rodgers
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Breach of Contract
Williams v. Simmons, et al.
as 26-4458
Plaintiff:
IMMANUEL CHRISTIAN WILLIAMS
Defendant:
UNKNOWN SIMMONS, RYAN THORNELL, DIRECTOR OF THE ARIZONA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, REHABILITATION, UNKNOWN REHM, K, Kaleb and others
Cain v. Moore et al
as 5:2026cv00200
Plaintiff:
Anthony Cain
Defendant:
Judge Andra Moore, Dennis Foust, Judge Jaminson and others
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.
