Cases 11 - 20 of 23
Esquibel v. Chambers et al
as 1:2010cv01279
Plaintiff:
Mark Anthony Esquibel
Defendant:
Carol (I) Chambers, Carol Chambers, Douglas (I) G. Bechtel and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Nasious v. Robinson, et al
as 10-1182
Plaintiff - Appellant:
JOHN NASIOUS
Defendant - Appellee:
J. GRAYSON ROBINSON, Arapahoe County Detention Facility and EDDIE CLIMER, Aramark Correctional Services
Isberg v. Robinson et al
as 1:2010cv00120
Petitioner:
David H. Isberg
Respondent:
Grayson Robinson and John Suthers
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Maestas v. Robinson et al
as 1:2009cv01904
Petitioner:
Frank Roberto Maestas
Respondent:
Grayson Robinson and Attorney General of the State of Colorado, The
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Kershaw v. Robinson et al
as 1:2009cv01872
Plaintiff:
Vito Joseph Kershaw
Defendant:
J. Grayson Robinson, County of Arapahoe and State of Colorado
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Searcy v. Robinson et al
as 1:2009cv00389
Petitioner:
Brian Robert Searcy
Respondent:
Grayson Robinson and Colorado Attorney General
Cause Of Action: Federal Question
Montgomery v. Robinson
as 09-1071
Petitioner - Appellant:
JASON A. MONTGOMERY
Respondent - Appellee:
GRAYSON ROBINSON
Montgomery v. Robinson et al
as 1:2008cv02833
Petitioner:
Jason A. Montgomery
Respondent:
Grayson Robinson
Cause Of Action: Federal Question
Tafoya v. White et al
as 1:2008cv02805
Plaintiff:
Anthony Tafoya
Defendant:
Sue (I) White, Sue White, J. (I) Grayson Robinson and others
Cause Of Action: Federal Question
Nasious v. Arapahoe County Detention Facility et al
as 1:2008cv00262
Plaintiff:
John Nasious
Defendant:
Arapahoe County Detention Facility, T. (I) Grayson Robinson, T. Grayson Robinson 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.
