Cases 1 - 10 of 18
Kodiak Blaine, et al v. Benefis Health System, et al
as 22-35497
Plaintiff / Appellant:
KODIAK BLAINE, DOUGLAS DARKO, CHRISTOPHER FLOWER and others
Defendant / Appellee:
BENEFIS HEALTH SYSTEM, BENEFIS HOSPITALS, INC., BENEFIS MEDICAL GROUP, INC. and others
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2021cv09824
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2021at01120
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1692
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2021cv02378
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1692 Fair Debt Collection Act
Blaine et al v. Benefis Health System et al
as 4:2021cv00092
Defendant:
Magellan Resource Partners, Benefis Health System, Benefis Hospitals, Inc. and others
Plaintiff:
Kodiak Blaine, Douglas Darko, Christopher Flower and others
Cause Of Action: 18 U.S.C. § 1964 Racketeering (RICO) Act
USA v. David Posey
as 21-30094
Defendant / Appellant:
DAVID POSEY
Plaintiff / Appellee:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
USA v. David Posey
as 20-30172
Defendant / Appellant:
DAVID POSEY
Plaintiff / Appellee:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
John Lucas v. County of Kern, et al
as 20-16439
Defendant / Appellee:
MICHAEL BARKER, MARY CLAIRE WALSH, COUNTY OF KERN and others
Plaintiff / Appellant:
JOHN LUCAS
USA v. David Posey
as 19-30058
Defendant / Appellant:
DAVID POSEY
Plaintiff / Appellee:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Richard Corley v. USDC-AZP
as 18-71701
:
In re: RICHARD EUGENE CORLEY
Petitioner:
RICHARD EUGENE CORLEY
Respondent:
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA, PHOENIX
Real Party In Interest:
GINA CUCUZELLA, Deputy County Attorney at Maricopa County and ARLENE R. POSEY, Detective at Phoenix Police Department/also named as Arlene Posey
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.
