Cases 1 - 10 of 27
(HC) Robben v. Allison
as 1:2021cv00657
Respondent:
Kathleen Allison
Petitioner:
Todd Robben and Todd Christian Robben
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Todd Robben v. George Jaime
as 19-17433
Respondent / Appellee:
GEORGE JAIME, Acting Warden, California City Correctional Facility
Petitioner / Appellant:
TODD ROBBEN
Todd Robben v. El Dorado County, et al
as 19-16318
Defendant / Appellee:
DALE GOMES, EL DORADO COUNTY, MIKE PIZZUTI and others
Plaintiff / Appellant:
TODD ROBBEN
Todd Robben v. City of South Lake Tahoe, et al
as 19-16214
Plaintiff / Appellant:
TODD ROBBEN
Defendant / Appellee:
CITY OF SOUTH LAKE TAHOE, BRIAN UHLER, CORY WILSON and others
Todd Robben v. USDC-SAC
as 19-71176
Petitioner:
TODD ROBBEN
Not Yet Classified:
JOHN D'AGOSTINI, El Dorado County Sheriff and GEORGE JAIME, Acting Warden, California City Correctional Facility
Not Classified By Court:
In re: TODD ROBBEN
Respondent:
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, SACRAMENTO
Todd Robben v. John D'Agostini
as 19-16014
Respondent / Appellee:
JOHN D'AGOSTINI, El Dorado County Sheriff
Petitioner / Appellant:
TODD ROBBEN
Todd Robben v. California Supreme Court, et al
as 19-15213
Plaintiff / Appellant:
TODD ROBBEN
Defendant / Appellee:
FRANK A. MCGUIRE, ANDREA K. WALLIN, CALIFORNIA SUPREME COURT and others
Todd Robben v. USDC-SAC
as 17-72959
:
In re: TODD ROBBEN
Petitioner:
TODD ROBBEN
Respondent:
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, SACRAMENTO
Real Party In Interest:
JOHN DAGOSTINI
Robben v. Dagostini
as 2:2017cv00532
Petitioner:
Todd Robben
Respondent:
John Dagostini
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Robben v. California Supreme Court et al
as 2:2016cv03023
Plaintiff:
Todd Robben
Defendant:
California Supreme Court, Third District Court of Appeals, Judicial Council of California and others
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.
