Cases 11 - 20 of 83
James v. Nanos et al
as 4:2024cv00030
Petitioner:
John Edwards James, III
Respondent:
Christopher Nanos and Attorney General of the State of Arizona
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Maldonado v. Pima, County of et al
as 4:2023cv00521
Plaintiff:
Kathleen Maldonado
Defendant:
Pima, County of, Chris Nanos, Aimee Conway and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Axos Bank v. Nano Banc et al
as 5:2019cv02092
Defendant:
Nano Banc, DOES 1 through 10, inclusive, Robert Hasler and others
Plaintiff:
Axos Bank
Lara-Sanchez v. Garland
as 23-996
Petitioner:
NANO LARA-SANCHEZ
Respondent:
MERRICK B. GARLAND, ATTORNEY GENERAL
Franklin v. Nanos et al
as 4:2023cv00288
Plaintiff:
Terrence Franklin
Defendant:
Chris Nanos and NaphCare
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Enabnit v. Nanos
as 4:2023cv00286
Plaintiff:
John Eugene Enabnit
Defendant:
Chris Nanos
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Daniella Gracia v. Mark Napier, et al
as 23-15831
Plaintiff / Appellant:
DANIELLA MARIE GRACIA
Defendant / Appellee:
MARK NAPIER, Pima County Sheriff, OFELIA DORSEY, #7531, Correctional Officer, WILLIAM GRIMSEY, #6095, Correctional Sergeant and others
Warren v. Nanos et al
as 4:2023cv00254
Plaintiff:
Johnny Lee Warren
Defendant:
Chris Nanos, Laura Conover, Samantha Walker and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Hernandez v. Tucson Police Department et al
as 4:2023cv00300
Plaintiff:
Lyle Anthony Hernandez
Defendant:
Tucson Police Department, Pima County Sheriff's Department, Pima County Adult Detention Center and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Turner v. Pima County Sheriff's Department et al
as 4:2023cv00315
Plaintiff:
Tobias Jay Turner
Defendant:
Pima County Sheriff's Department, Chris Nanos, Matthew Ranson 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.
