Cases 1 - 10 of 38
ANDERSON v. KNIGHT et al
as 1:2023cv03668
Petitioner:
TIMOTHY ANDERSON
Respondent:
STEVIE KNIGHT and FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
Nathaniel Gann v. Valley State Prison, et al
as 22-16862
Plaintiff / Appellant:
NATHANIEL MARCUS GANN
Defendant / Appellee:
VALLEY STATE PRISON, CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS AND REHABILITATION, STATEWIDE RELIGIOUS REVIEW COMMITTEE, J. KNIGHT, Appeals Examiner at the Office of Appeals (CDCR) and others
NEWSUAN v. ANDERSON
as 2:2022cv04183
Plaintiff:
MAURICE NEWSUAN
Defendant:
C/O TIMOTHY ANDERSON
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
NEWSUAN v. ANDERSON
as 2:2022cv04126
Plaintiff:
MAURICE NEWSUAN
Defendant:
TIMOTHY ANDERSON
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Anderson v. Treadway
as 22-60378
Petitioner / Appellant:
Timothy Anderson
Respondent / Appellee:
Acting Warden Treadway
Anderson v. United States of America
as 3:2021cv00821
Plaintiff:
Timothy Anderson
Defendant:
United States of America
Interested Party:
Pro Se Department
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Federal)
(PC) Zelaya v. Valley State Prison et al
as 1:2020cv00033
Plaintiff:
Oscar Zelaya
Defendant:
Paez, Raythel Fisher, Jr., Clements and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
(PC) Phillips v. Valley State Prison et al
as 1:2020cv00022
Defendant:
Paez, Raythel Fisher, Jr., Clements and others
Plaintiff:
David E. Phillips
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
(PC) Ebel v. Valley State Prison et al
as 1:2020cv00034
Defendant:
Paez, Raythel Fisher, Jr., Clements and others
Plaintiff:
Vladimir R. Ebel
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
(PC) Fox v. Valley State Prison et al
as 1:2020cv00030
Defendant:
Paez, Raythel Fisher, Jr., Clements and others
Plaintiff:
Thomas Michael Joseph Fox
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 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.
