Cases 31 - 40 of 42
William Brandstatt v. California Substance Abuse and, et al
as 14-15025
Plaintiff - Appellant:
WILLIAM HUBERT LOYD BRANDSTATT
Defendant - Appellee:
CALIFORNIA SUBSTANCE ABUSE AND TREATMENT FACILITY, STATE PRISON MEDICAL STAFF, ANTHONY ENENMOH and others
William Brandstatt v. California Substance Abuse and, et al
as 13-17201
Plaintiff - Appellant:
WILLIAM HUBERT LOYD BRANDSTATT
Defendant - Appellee:
CALIFORNIA SUBSTANCE ABUSE AND TREATMENT FACILITY, STATE PRISON MEDICAL STAFF, ANTHONY ENENMOH and others
Bussiere v. Kokor et al
as 1:2013cv01565
Plaintiff:
Arthur T. Bussiere
Defendant:
W. Kokor, Hashemi, Tiggs Brown and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Lacarl Tigg v. Roland Colson
as 13-5906
Petitioner - Appellant:
LACARL TERRELL TIGG
Respondent - Appellee:
ROLAND COLSON, Warden
Tigg v. Colson
as 3:2013cv00324
Petitioner:
Lacarl Terrell Tigg
Respondent:
Roland Colson
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Brandstatt v. California Substance Abuse and Treatment Facility, et al.
as 1:2013cv00434
Plaintiff:
William Hubert Loyd Brandstatt
Defendant:
California Substance Abuse and Treatment Facility, State Prison Medical Staff, Anthony Enenmoh and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Davis v. Robinson et al
as 1:2012cv04452
Plaintiff:
Zekemian Tyrone Davis
Defendant:
J D. Robinson, Darlene Tiggs, Andy Pascuals and others
Lucas v. Correct Care Solution et al
as 2:2010cv02602
Plaintiff:
Kelvin Cortez Lucas
Defendant:
Correct Care Solution, Swift, Nancy Tiggs and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Malone v. Shelby County et al
as 2:2010cv02561
Plaintiff:
Mario M. Malone
Defendant:
Shelby County, Nancy Tiggs and Boone
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Tiggs v. Curry et al
as 4:2007cv02620
Plaintiff:
Abraham T. Tiggs
Defendant:
B. Curry, R.E. Compton, K. Eifert and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
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.
