University of Michigan Law School
Civil Rights Litigation Clearinghouse
new search
page permalink
Case Name Armstrong v. Schwarzenegger PC-CA-0001
Docket / Court 4:94-cv-02307-CW ( N.D. Cal. )
State/Territory California
Case Type(s) Disability Rights-Pub. Accom.
Prison Conditions
Special Collection California's Prisoners' Rights Bar article
Attorney Organization Prison Law Office
Rosen, Bien, Galvan & Grunfeld
Case Summary
On June 29, 1994, disabled prisoners and parolees in California filed this lawsuit in the U.S. District Court of the Northern District of California, charging that, on account of their disabilities, the two divisions of the California Youth and Adult Corrections Authority California, Department of ... read more >
On June 29, 1994, disabled prisoners and parolees in California filed this lawsuit in the U.S. District Court of the Northern District of California, charging that, on account of their disabilities, the two divisions of the California Youth and Adult Corrections Authority California, Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation ("CDCR") and Board of Prison Terms ("BPT"), were generally depriving disabled prisoners of benefits and accommodations provided to other prisoners or required by due process. Plaintiffs were represented by the Prison Law Office, the Disability Rights Education and Defense Fund, and private attorneys. They sought declaratory and injunctive relief for violations of the Americans with Disabilities Act ("ADA"), 42 U.S.C. § 12131-34, the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 ("Rehab Act"), 29 U.S.C. § 794, and the Due Process Clause of the Constitution.

The district court (Judge Claudia Wilken) certified the plaintiff class in January 1995. In December 1998, the parties stipulated to amend the class definition to include "all present and future California state prisoners and parolees with mobility, sight, hearing, learning, and kidney disabilities that substantially limit one or more of their major life activities." The class was further modified in January 1999 to include prisoners and parolees with developmental disabilities.

By agreement of the parties, the claims against CDCR (prison claims) and BPT (parolee claims) were bifurcated and proceeded on two different litigation tracks. Plaintiffs and CDCR entered into a settlement agreement that agreed to liability for CDCR, if the district court found the ADA and Rehab Act applied to prisons. The district court did find that both statutes applied to state prisons. Armstrong v. Wilson, 942 F.Supp. 1252, 1258-59 (N.D. Cal. 1996). The court also found that the State was not entitled to immunity under the Eleventh Amendment for its violations of the ADA and Rehab Act. Id. at 1263. The district court entered a remedial order and injunction directing CDCR to develop a plan for compliance with the statutes by improving access to prison programs for prisoners with physical disabilities at all of California's prisons and parole facilities. The State appealed, and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit (Judge Alfred Goodwin) affirmed. Armstrong v. Wilson, 124 F.3d 1019 (9th Cir. 1997).

The claims against BPT were litigated by the parties; the district court held a bench trial in April 1999. Plaintiffs offered evidence including stories of a prisoner who used a wheelchair forced to crawl to a hearing, a deaf prisoner rendered unable to communicate with a sign language interpreter because he was shackled, and a blind inmate left without assistance to read complicated written materials. The court issued a permanent injunction in March 2001 and ordered the State to come into compliance with the ADA and the Rehab Act by identifying disabled prisoners and providing them with accessible locations for parole hearings, assistance in communicating, and special aid in the screening, appeals, and grievance processes.

The State appealed, asserting that the injunction regarding parole hearings was overbroad and violated the Prison Litigation Reform Act ("PLRA"). In November 2001, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit (Judge Stephen Reinhardt) found that the class certified by the district court was overbroad, in that it included sexually violent predators, mentally disordered offenders, and prisoners or parolees with renal impairments--groups not represented by any named plaintiff. Armstrong v. Davis, 275 F.3d 849 (9th Cir. 2001). The injunction was upheld in all other respects.

The court entered a Revised Permanent Injunction on February 11, 2002, which required that the State create and maintain a system for tracking prisoners and parolees with disabilities, take reasonable steps to identify prisoners and parolees with disabilities prior to parole proceedings, and provide reasonable accommodations to prisoners and parolees with disabilities at all parole proceedings, including parole revocations and revocation extensions, life prisoner hearings, mentally disordered offender proceedings, and sexually violent predator proceedings. The State failed to fully comply with the provisions of the Revised Permanent Injunction and the Plaintiffs filed an enforcement motion, which was granted in an order against the BPT defendants entered on May 30, 2006.

In November 2006, Plaintiffs sought imposition of a population cap in California state prisons. Many of Plaintiffs' complaints about disabled prisoners being denied their rights stemmed from the fact that prisons were dramatically overcrowded, resulting in disabled prisoners often being placed in administrative segregation due to lack of space. However, at this time there were several ongoing class action law suits having to do with prison conditions in California. In this case, the district court appointed an expert in 2007 to facilitate the coordination of remedial processes in this case with three other pending class actions: Coleman v. Brown (E.D. Cal.), Plata v. Brown (N.D. Cal.), and Perez v. Tilton (N.D. Cal.). The district court also decided that issues relating to the sought population cap would be addressed in the other lawsuits.

On January 18, 2007, Judge Wilken issued a separate Injunction. She found that despite extensive monitoring of CDCR institutions by plaintiffs' counsel, the State was continuing to severely violate the rights of prisoners with disabilities under the ADA and Rehab Aact. She found the State was not compliant with the law, the Revised Permanent Injunction, or its own Remedial Plan (first put forth in 1998, and amended in 2001, 2002, and 2006). The violations were occurring with regard to inaccessible housing, denial of sign language interpreters to prisoners who need them, confiscation of medically prescribed assistive devices, late and inadequate disability grievance responses, and inadequate disability tracking. Judge Wilken ordered that the State increase the number of staff on its compliance and grievance response teams, develop and implement a state-wide computerized tracking system and integrate it with the tracking system previously ordered in February 2002, generate an inventory of accessible housing, develop a system to hold wardens and prison medical administrators accountable for compliance with the Remedial Plan and other court orders, provide proper training to health care staff and correctional officers, and establish permanent salaried positions for sign language interpreters.

The remedial phase of the litigation has continued since 2007. Defendants argued unsuccessfully on numerous occasions that they have no duty to provide reasonable accommodations for prisoners and parolees under the ADA. Defendants also argued that when they sent class members sent to county facilities, they were not responsible for any ADA noncompliance that occurred. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit (Judge Stephen Reinhardt) issued an opinion in 2010 that summarily rejected these arguments. However, it did remand to the district court for further hearings on whether system-wide relief was necessary on the grounds that the evidentiary record as presented was not sufficient. Once remanded, the Plaintiffs submitted additional evidence as to the nature and extent of violations, and the district court issued an order granting the renewed system-wide enforcement motion.

In 2012, the district court modified the 2007 injunction to clarify what was expected of the State. The modified injunction provided that the court-appointed expert would solve disputes between the parties. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit (Judge Tashima) vacated the provisions in the modified injunction relating to the dispute resolution mechanism, finding that it was an impermissible delegation of authority to an expert. The district court then amended the dispute resolution mechanism to make it reviewable by the district court on motion by any dissatisfied party.

On February 3, 2015, the district court granted a motion for further enforcement of the 2007 injunction. Judge Wilken found the State was still routinely housing class members in administrative segregation because of lack of housing in violation of the ADA and the court's prior orders. She ordered that if the State placed class members in administrative segregation, they needed to fully document their reason for doing so and submit such report to plaintiff's counsel. 2015 WL 496799.

On March 26, 2015, Judge Wilken filed a stipulated order confirming the undisputed attorneys' fees and costs for the fourth quarter of 2014. The amount totaled $1,190,379.99.

On June 29, 2015, Judge Wilken filed a stipulated order confirming the undisputed attorneys' fees and costs for the first quarter of 2015. The amount totaled $1,090,718.30.

On September 25, 3015, Judge Wilken filed a stipulated order confirming the undisputed attorneys' fees and costs for the second quarter of 2015. The amount totaled $1,246,103.35.

Kristen Sagar - 11/13/2008
Anna Dimon - 03/19/2015
Jessica Kincaid - 11/04/2015


compress summary

- click to show/hide ALL -
Issues and Causes of Action
click to show/hide detail
Issues
Affected Gender
Female
Male
Constitutional Clause
Cruel and Unusual Punishment
Due Process
Content of Injunction
Discrimination Prohibition
Implement complaint/dispute resolution process
Monitoring
Reasonable Accommodation
Recordkeeping
Reporting
Defendant-type
Corrections
Jurisdiction-wide
Disability
Hearing impairment
Mental impairment
Mobility impairment
Visual impairment
Discrimination-basis
Disability (inc. reasonable accommodations)
General
Access to lawyers or judicial system
Administrative segregation
Bathing and hygiene
Bathrooms
Buildings
Classification / placement
Conditions of confinement
Confinement/isolation
Disparate Treatment
Housing
Reasonable Accommodations
Reasonable Modifications
Recreation / Exercise
Totality of conditions
TTY/Close Captioning/etc.
Plaintiff Type
Private Plaintiff
Type of Facility
Government-run
Causes of Action Section 504 (Rehabilitation Act), 29 U.S.C. § 701
Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), 42 U.S.C. §§ 12111 et seq.
Defendant(s) California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation
Plaintiff Description All present and future California state prison inmates and parolees with mobility, sight, hearing, learning, mental, kidney, or developmental disabilities.
Indexed Lawyer Organizations Prison Law Office
Rosen, Bien, Galvan & Grunfeld
Class action status sought Yes
Class action status granted Yes
Prevailing Party Plaintiff
Public Int. Lawyer Yes
Nature of Relief Attorneys fees
Injunction / Injunctive-like Settlement
Source of Relief Litigation
Form of Settlement Court Approved Settlement or Consent Decree
Order Duration 1999 - n/a
Case Closing Year n/a
Case Ongoing Yes
Case Listing PC-CA-0033 : Perez v. Tilton (N.D. Cal.)
Additional Resources
click to show/hide detail
Case Studies Civil Rights Injunctions Over Time: A Case Study of Jail and Prison Court Orders
N.Y.U. Law Review
By: Margo Schlanger (Washington University)
Citation: 81 N.Y.U. L. Rev. 550 (2006)
[ Detail ] [ PDF ] [ External Link ]

  Insurer Must Pay $100.5 Million in Redlining Case
The New York Times
Written: Oct. 27, 1998
By: Joseph B. Treaster
[ Detail ] [ External Link ]

  Judicial Policy Making and the Modern State: How the Courts Reformed America's Prisons
By: Malcolm M. Feeley & Edward Rubin (UC Berkeley Boalt Hall School of Law & Vanderbilt School of Law Faculty)
Citation: (1998)
[ Detail ]

  Nationwide Settles Virginia Redlining Suit
Property Casualty 360
Written: May. 06, 2000
By: Amanda Levin
[ Detail ] [ External Link ]

Docket(s)
4:94-cv-02307-CW (N.D. Cal.) 10/15/2015
PC-CA-0001-9001 PDF | Detail
PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
General Documents
2007 Annual Report
PC-CA-0001-0013 PDF | External Link | Detail
Statement of Stipulated Facts (for Settlement Purposes Only) 05/01/1996
PC-CA-0001-0001 PDF | Detail
Remedial Order, Injunction, and Certification of Interlocutory Appeal Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1292(b) 09/20/1996 (N.D. Cal.)
PC-CA-0001-0020 PDF | Detail
Document Source: Plaintiffs' counsel
Order Denying Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment 09/20/1996 (942 F.Supp. 1252) (N.D. Cal.)
PC-CA-0001-0025 PDF | WESTLAW| LEXIS | Detail
Document Source: Google Scholar
Appellate Opinion 08/27/1997 (124 F.3d 1019)
PC-CA-0001-0002 PDF | WESTLAW| LEXIS | Detail
Document Source: Google Scholar
Memorandum 04/11/2000 (215 F.3d 1332)
PC-CA-0001-0027 PDF | WESTLAW| LEXIS | Detail
Document Source: Google Scholar
Opinion 11/28/2001 (275 F.3d 849)
PC-CA-0001-0023 PDF | WESTLAW| LEXIS | Detail
Document Source: Google Scholar
CA DOC Armstrong v. Davis Board of Prison Terms Parole Proceedings Remedial Plan 01/04/2002
PC-CA-0001-0005 PDF | Detail
Stipulation and Order on Revised Injunction 02/11/2002 (N.D. Cal.)
PC-CA-0001-0008 PDF | Detail
Document Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
Opinion 10/07/2002 (537 U.S. 812)
PC-CA-0001-0037 PDF | WESTLAW| LEXIS | Detail
Document Source: Westlaw
Opinion 02/10/2003 (318 F.3d 965)
PC-CA-0001-0024 PDF | WESTLAW| LEXIS | Detail
Document Source: Google Scholar
Memorandum 02/10/2003 (58 Fed.Appx. 695)
PC-CA-0001-0026 PDF | WESTLAW| LEXIS | Detail
Order Granting Motion to Enforce Revised Permanent Injunction 05/30/2006 (N.D. Cal.)
PC-CA-0001-0010 PDF | Detail
Injunction 01/18/2007 (N.D. Cal.)
PC-CA-0001-0049 PDF | Detail
Document Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
Order Appointing Court Expert Pursuant to Federal Rule of Evidence 706 06/11/2007 (N.D. Cal.)
PC-CA-0001-0009 PDF | Detail
Document Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
Plaintiffs' Notice of Motion and Motion to Enforce Compliance with May 30, 2006 Order; Memorandum of Points and Authorities 06/15/2007
PC-CA-0001-0011 PDF | Detail
Document Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
Order Granting in Part Plaintiffs' Motion to Enforce the May 30, 2006 Order 09/11/2007 (N.D. Cal.)
PC-CA-0001-0012 PDF | Detail
Document Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
Order and Construction Agreement 02/26/2008 (E.D. Cal.)
PC-CA-0001-0014 PDF | Detail
Document Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
Order Approving Information Technology Coordination Agreement 03/10/2008 (E.D. Cal.)
PC-CA-0001-0015 PDF | Detail
Document Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
Order Approving Space Coordination Agreement 10/07/2008 (E.D. Cal.)
PC-CA-0001-0016 PDF | Detail
Document Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
Order to Show Cause (Re: Health Care Administrative Appeals Coordination Agreement) 01/15/2009 (N.D. Cal.)
PC-CA-0001-0017 PDF | Detail
Document Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
Order to Show Cause (Re: Transcription and Dictation Coordination Agreement) 01/15/2009 (N.D. Cal.)
PC-CA-0001-0018 PDF | Detail
Document Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
Order Granting Plaintiffs' Motion to Require Defendants to Track and Accommodate needs of Armstrong Class Members Housed in County Jails and Ensure Access to a Workable Grievance Procedure 09/16/2009 (261 F.R.D. 173) (N.D. Cal.)
PC-CA-0001-0043 PDF | WESTLAW| LEXIS | Detail
Document Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
Enforcement Order 10/20/2009 (N.D. Cal.)
PC-CA-0001-0044 PDF | Detail
Document Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
Opinion 09/07/2010 (622 F.3d 1058)
PC-CA-0001-0042 PDF | WESTLAW| LEXIS | Detail
Document Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
Amended Order Granting Plaintiffs' Renewed Motion to Require Defendants to Track and Accommodate Needs of Armstrong Class Members Housed in County Jails, Ensure Access to a Grievance Procedure, and to Enforce 2001 Permanent Injunction 04/11/2012 (N.D. Cal.)
PC-CA-0001-0021 PDF | Detail
Document Source: Plaintiffs' counsel
Amended Order Granting Plaintiffs' Renewed Motion to Require Defendants to Track and Accommodate Needs of Armstrong Class Members Housed in County Jails, Ensure Access to a Grievance Procedure, and to Enforce 2001 Permanent Injunction 04/11/2012 (857 F.Supp.2d 919) (N.D. Cal.)
PC-CA-0001-0045 PDF | WESTLAW| LEXIS | Detail
Document Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
Order Denying Motion for Contempt, Denying as Moot Motion to Strike and Modifying Permanent Injunction 08/22/2012 (2012 WL 3638675) (N.D. Cal.)
PC-CA-0001-0046 PDF | WESTLAW | Detail
Document Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
Order Distributing and Enforcing the Amended County Jail Order And Plan 08/28/2012 (N.D. Cal.)
PC-CA-0001-0029 PDF | Detail
Document Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
Opinion in Support of Order Distributing and Enforcing the Amended County Jail Order and Plan 08/28/2012 (N.D. Cal.)
PC-CA-0001-0047 PDF | Detail
Document Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
Defendants’ Reply To Plaintiffs’ Response To Order Directing Parties To File Briefs Addressing Monitoring by The Office of The Inspector General 05/06/2013
PC-CA-0001-0032 PDF | Detail
Document Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
Defendants’ Evidentiary Objections and Request to Strike the Expert Declaration of Pablo Stewart, Exhibits 3-5, and Paragraph 7 to the Declaration of Corene Kendrick in Support of Plaintiffs’ Reply to Defendants’ Opposition [Truncated Title] 05/16/2013
PC-CA-0001-0031 PDF | Detail
Document Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
Opinion 10/04/2013 (732 F.3d 955)
PC-CA-0001-0034 PDF | WESTLAW| LEXIS | Detail
Document Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
Order Granting Motion For A Further Enforcement Order and Denying Motion To Hold Defendants in Contempt of Court 06/04/2014 (N.D. Cal.)
PC-CA-0001-0033 PDF | Detail
Document Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
Opinion 09/26/2014 (768 F.3d 975)
PC-CA-0001-0039 PDF | WESTLAW| LEXIS | Detail
Document Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
Order Revising the Modified Injunction 12/05/2014 (N.D. Cal.)
PC-CA-0001-0038 PDF | Detail
Document Source: Bloomberg Law
Order Modifying January 18, 2007 Injunction 12/29/2014 (N.D. Cal.)
PC-CA-0001-0041 PDF | Detail
Document Source: Bloomberg Law
Order Granting Motion for Further Enforcement 02/03/2015 (2015 WL 496799) (N.D. Cal.)
PC-CA-0001-0040 PDF | WESTLAW | Detail
Document Source: Bloomberg Law
Defendant's Report in Response the Court's February 3, 2015 Order 03/16/2015
PC-CA-0001-0050 PDF | Detail
Document Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
Stipulated Order Confirming Undisputed Attorneys' Fees and Costs for the Fourth Quarter of 2014 03/26/2015 (N.D. Cal.)
PC-CA-0001-0051 PDF | Detail
Document Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
Stipulated Order Confirming Undisputed Attorneys' Fees and Costs for the First Quarter of 2015 06/29/2015 (N.D. Cal.)
PC-CA-0001-0053 PDF | Detail
Document Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
Stipulated Order Confirming Undisputed Attorney's Fees and Costs for the Second Quarter of 2015 09/25/2015 (N.D. Cal.)
PC-CA-0001-0054 PDF | Detail
Document Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
Judges Alarcon, Arthur Lawrence (Ninth Circuit)
PC-CA-0001-0027
Berzon, Marsha Siegel (Ninth Circuit)
PC-CA-0001-0023 | PC-CA-0001-0024 | PC-CA-0001-0026 | PC-CA-0001-0034 | PC-CA-0001-0042
Goodwin, Alfred Theodore (Ninth Circuit, D. Or.)
PC-CA-0001-0002
Henderson, Thelton Eugene (N.D. Cal.)
PC-CA-0001-0014 | PC-CA-0001-0015 | PC-CA-0001-0016 | PC-CA-0001-0017 | PC-CA-0001-0018
Karlton, Lawrence K. (E.D. Cal.)
PC-CA-0001-0014 | PC-CA-0001-0015 | PC-CA-0001-0016 | PC-CA-0001-0017 | PC-CA-0001-0018
Nelson, Dorothy Wright (Ninth Circuit)
PC-CA-0001-0002
Reinhardt, Stephen Roy (Ninth Circuit)
PC-CA-0001-0024 | PC-CA-0001-0026 | PC-CA-0001-0034 | PC-CA-0001-0042
Silverman, Barry G. (D. Ariz., Ninth Circuit) [Magistrate]
PC-CA-0001-0027
Tashima, Atsushi Wallace (Ninth Circuit, C.D. Cal.)
PC-CA-0001-0024 | PC-CA-0001-0026 | PC-CA-0001-0034 | PC-CA-0001-0039 | PC-CA-0001-0042
Trott, Stephen S. (Ninth Circuit)
PC-CA-0001-0002
Van Graafeiland, Ellsworth Alfred (Second Circuit)
PC-CA-0001-0027
White, Jeffrey Steven (N.D. Cal.)
PC-CA-0001-0014 | PC-CA-0001-0015 | PC-CA-0001-0016 | PC-CA-0001-0017 | PC-CA-0001-0018
Wilken, Claudia Ann (N.D. Cal.) [Magistrate]
PC-CA-0001-0001 | PC-CA-0001-0008 | PC-CA-0001-0009 | PC-CA-0001-0010 | PC-CA-0001-0012 | PC-CA-0001-0014 | PC-CA-0001-0015 | PC-CA-0001-0016 | PC-CA-0001-0017 | PC-CA-0001-0018 | PC-CA-0001-0020 | PC-CA-0001-0021 | PC-CA-0001-0025 | PC-CA-0001-0029 | PC-CA-0001-0033 | PC-CA-0001-0038 | PC-CA-0001-0040 | PC-CA-0001-0041 | PC-CA-0001-0043 | PC-CA-0001-0044 | PC-CA-0001-0045 | PC-CA-0001-0046 | PC-CA-0001-0047 | PC-CA-0001-0049 | PC-CA-0001-0051 | PC-CA-0001-0053 | PC-CA-0001-0054 | PC-CA-0001-9001
Monitors/Masters None on record
Plaintiff's Lawyers Asaro, Andrea G. (California)
PC-CA-0001-0024
Baldwin, Holly MacLeish (California)
PC-CA-0001-0011 | PC-CA-0001-9001
Bien, Michael W. (California)
PC-CA-0001-0008 | PC-CA-0001-0009 | PC-CA-0001-0011 | PC-CA-0001-0020 | PC-CA-0001-0024 | PC-CA-0001-0054 | PC-CA-0001-9001
Cervantez, Eve Hedy (California)
PC-CA-0001-9001
Ells, Lisa Adrienne (California)
PC-CA-0001-9001
Evenson, Rebekah B. (California)
PC-CA-0001-0054 | PC-CA-0001-9001
Feeser, Mark Raymond (California)
PC-CA-0001-9001
Feingold, Lainey (California)
PC-CA-0001-0008 | PC-CA-0001-0020 | PC-CA-0001-9001
Feingold, Elaine B. (California)
PC-CA-0001-9001
Fernholz, William (California)
PC-CA-0001-0008 | PC-CA-0001-9001
Freedman, Michael Louis (California)
PC-CA-0001-0054 | PC-CA-0001-9001
Galvan, Ernest (California)
PC-CA-0001-0054 | PC-CA-0001-9001
George, Warren E. Jr. (California)
PC-CA-0001-0008 | PC-CA-0001-0009 | PC-CA-0001-0011 | PC-CA-0001-0020 | PC-CA-0001-9001
Godbold, Penny (California)
PC-CA-0001-9001
Grunfeld, Gay Crosthwait (California)
PC-CA-0001-0009 | PC-CA-0001-0011 | PC-CA-0001-0054 | PC-CA-0001-9001
Hagler, Megan (California)
PC-CA-0001-9001
Hanson, Shawn A. (California)
PC-CA-0001-0008 | PC-CA-0001-9001
Hardy, Alison (California)
PC-CA-0001-9001
Holtz, Geoffrey Thomas (California)
PC-CA-0001-0054 | PC-CA-0001-9001
Huey, Shirley (California)
PC-CA-0001-9001
Jonak, Jennifer Lee (California)
PC-CA-0001-0008 | PC-CA-0001-9001
Kendrick, Corene Thaedra (California)
PC-CA-0001-9001
Kilb, Linda D. (California)
PC-CA-0001-0009 | PC-CA-0001-0054 | PC-CA-0001-9001
Loren, Stewart Grey (California)
PC-CA-0001-9001
Mania, Anne (California)
PC-CA-0001-0011 | PC-CA-0001-9001
Mayerson, Arlene Brynne (California)
PC-CA-0001-0008 | PC-CA-0001-9001
Mitchell, Caroline N. (California)
PC-CA-0001-0008 | PC-CA-0001-0009 | PC-CA-0001-0011 | PC-CA-0001-9001
Morris, Maria V. (Alabama)
PC-CA-0001-9001
Norman, Sara Linda (California)
PC-CA-0001-0008 | PC-CA-0001-0009 | PC-CA-0001-9001
Shapiro, Eve H. (California)
PC-CA-0001-0002 | PC-CA-0001-9001
Specter, Donald H. (California)
PC-CA-0001-0001 | PC-CA-0001-0002 | PC-CA-0001-0008 | PC-CA-0001-0009 | PC-CA-0001-0011 | PC-CA-0001-0020 | PC-CA-0001-0054 | PC-CA-0001-9001
Stewart, Loren Grey (California)
PC-CA-0001-9001
Thompson, Blake (California)
PC-CA-0001-0054 | PC-CA-0001-9001
Walczak, Kenneth M. (California)
PC-CA-0001-9001
Whelan, Amy (California)
PC-CA-0001-9001
Defendant's Lawyers Blonien, Jessica N. (California)
PC-CA-0001-0024
Druliner, David P. (California)
PC-CA-0001-9001
East, Rochelle C. (California)
PC-CA-0001-9001
Feudale, Scott John (California)
PC-CA-0001-9001
Fluet, Edward Rheem (California)
PC-CA-0001-0050 | PC-CA-0001-9001
Fritz, Cynthia Clarke (California)
PC-CA-0001-9001
Garske, Sharon Anne (California)
PC-CA-0001-0050 | PC-CA-0001-0054 | PC-CA-0001-9001
German, G. Michael (California)
PC-CA-0001-0024
Goldman, Jay M. (California)
PC-CA-0001-0031 | PC-CA-0001-0032 | PC-CA-0001-9001
Grunder, Frances T. (California)
PC-CA-0001-0008 | PC-CA-0001-9001
Harris, Kamala D. (California)
PC-CA-0001-0031 | PC-CA-0001-0032 | PC-CA-0001-0050
Humes, James M. (California)
PC-CA-0001-0002 | PC-CA-0001-9001
Kao, Bryan An-Chieh (California)
PC-CA-0001-0050 | PC-CA-0001-9001
Lenk, Morris (California)
PC-CA-0001-9001
Lewis, Kyle Anthony (California)
PC-CA-0001-9001
McKinney, Patrick R. (California)
PC-CA-0001-0050 | PC-CA-0001-9001
Mello, Paul Brian (California)
PC-CA-0001-9001
Nelson, Katherine Kylin (California)
PC-CA-0001-9001
Nguyen, Giam Minh (California)
PC-CA-0001-9001
Nygaard, Jennifer J (California)
PC-CA-0001-9001
O'Bannon, Danielle Felice (California)
PC-CA-0001-9001
Perkell, Jennifer G. (California)
PC-CA-0001-9001
Prince, George D. (California)
PC-CA-0001-0020 | PC-CA-0001-9001
Quinn, Michael James (California)
PC-CA-0001-9001
Rice, Benjamin Terrence (California)
PC-CA-0001-9001
Russell, Jay C. (California)
PC-CA-0001-0050 | PC-CA-0001-9001
Siggins, Peter J. (California)
PC-CA-0001-0001
Smith, Janelle M. (California)
PC-CA-0001-9001
Valdez, Danette E. (California)
PC-CA-0001-9001
Zelidon-Zapeda, Jose Alfonso (California)
PC-CA-0001-9001
Zelidon-Zepeda, Jose Alfonso (California)
PC-CA-0001-9001
Other Lawyers Adam, Gregg Mclean (California)
PC-CA-0001-9001
Albertine, Christine (California)
PC-CA-0001-9001
Galanter, Seth Michael (District of Columbia)
PC-CA-0001-0002
Perley, Sharon N. (District of Columbia)
PC-CA-0001-0020 | PC-CA-0001-9001
Stoughton, Jennifer Spencer (California)
PC-CA-0001-9001
Swanson, Edward W. (California)
PC-CA-0001-9001
Sybesma, Benjamin C. (California)
PC-CA-0001-9001
Uitti, Mary Beth (California)
PC-CA-0001-9001
Utti, Mary Beth (California)
PC-CA-0001-0020
Yank, Ronald (California)
PC-CA-0001-9001

- click to show/hide ALL -

new search
page permalink

- top of page -