Cases 31 - 40 of 47
US v. Soto-Beniquez
as 09-2114
Appellee:
UNITED STATES
Defendant - Appellant:
WILLIAM SOTO-BENIQUEZ, a/k/a William Soto-Enriquez, a/k/a William Descamisao
Interested Party:
STATE ELECTIONS COMMISSION
Soto v. Kolb et al
as 2:2009cv01654
Plaintiff:
William Soto
Defendant:
Kolb and Picto
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Soto v. San Quentin State Prison et al
as 3:2009cv01566
Plaintiff:
William Soto
Defendant:
San Quentin State Prison and Quezada
Cause Of Action: Federal Question
Soto v. Jordan et al
as 2:2008cv02687
Plaintiff:
William Soto
Defendant:
- Jordan, Thomas Warriner and County of Yolo
Cause Of Action: Federal Question
Jonathan Riches v. Lawrence Jegen, III
as 08-6708
Plaintiff - Appellant:
JONATHAN LEE RICHES
Defendant - Appellee:
LAWRENCE A. JEGEN, III, THOMAS F. SHEEHAN, WILLIAM SOTO-BENIQUEZ and others
Soto v. Duel Vocational Institute, et al
as 2:2008cv00813
Plaintiff:
William Soto
Defendant:
Duel Vocational Institution and Kevin Kostecky
Cause Of Action: Federal Question
Mark Ferrell, et al v. William Soto, et al
as 08-1775
Plaintiff - Appellant:
MARK FERRELL and CYNTHIA FERRELL
Defendant - Appellee:
WILLIAM SOTO, in his official and individual capacities, J. A. KEANE, CITY OF CHICAGO and others
Riches v. Soto-Beniquez et al
as 6:2008cv00825
Plaintiff:
Jonathan Lee Riches
Defendant:
William Soto-Beniquez and Juan Soto-Ramirez
Cause Of Action: Federal Question
Mark Ferrell, et al v. William Soto, et al
as 08-1299
Plaintiff - Appellant:
MARK FERRELL and CYNTHIA FERRELL
Defendant - Appellee:
WILLIAM SOTO, in his official and individual capacities, J. A. KEANE, CITY OF CHICAGO and others
Soto v. CA Dept of Corrections et al
as 2:2007cv01908
Plaintiff:
William Soto
Defendant:
CA Dept of Corrections, Duel Vocational Institution and Michelle Street
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.
