Cases 21 - 30 of 47
USA v. Larry Sept, Jr.
as 16-30232
Plaintiff - Appellee:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Defendant - Appellant:
LARRY BURNELL SEPT, Jr.
Hill v. Peterson, Burnell, Gluaser & Allred et al
as 3:2016cv02476
Plaintiff:
Carla Hill
Defendant:
Peterson, Burnell, Gluaser & Allred, Richard Peterson and Does 1-10
Cause Of Action: 18 U.S.C. § 1964
Burnell et al v. Marin Humane Society et al
as 3:2014cv05635
Plaintiff:
Jill Burnell and Alex Burnell
Defendant:
Marin Humane Society, County of Marin, Nancy McKenney and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
Anvil Entertainment, Inc. et al v. Keegan Wilcox et al
as 2:2014cv08107
Plaintiff:
Anvil Entertainment, Inc., Josh Burnell and Mike De Trana
Defendant:
Does, One Hundred To One Productions, Inc. and Keegan Wilcox
Burnell v. Maricopa County Durango Jail et al
as 2:2014cv01840
Defendant:
Maricopa County Durango Jail and Joseph M Arpaio
Plaintiff:
Jode Carl Burnell
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Securities and Exchange Commission v. John Thornes et al
as 2:2014cv06088
Defendant:
Christopher Burnell, Kyle Larick, Doreen Thornes and others
Plaintiff:
Securities and Exchange Commission
Securities and Exchange Commission v. John Thornes et al
as 5:2014cv01598
Defendant:
Christopher Burnell, Kyle Larick, Doreen Thornes and others
Plaintiff:
Securities and Exchange Commission
John Burnell, et al v. Swift Transportation Co. of AZ
as 13-56630
Plaintiff - Appellant:
JOHN BURNELL, JACK POLLOCK and GILBERT SAUCILLO
Defendant - Appellee:
SWIFT TRANSPORTATION COMPANY OF ARIZONA, LLC, an Arizona corporation
John Burnell, et al v. Swift Transportation Co. of AZ
as 13-56630
Plaintiff / Appellant:
GILBERT SAUCILLO, JACK POLLOCK and JOHN BURNELL
Defendant / Appellee:
SWIFT TRANSPORTATION COMPANY OF ARIZONA, LLC, an Arizona corporation
Joe Burnell v. Martin Biter
as 12-73145
Petitioner:
JOE BABY BURNELL
Respondent:
MARTIN BITER, Acting Warden
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.
