Cases 41 - 50 of 50
Eric Clark v. James Arnold, et al
as 12-15601
Petitioner / Appellant:
ERIC MICHAEL CLARK
Respondent / Appellee:
JAMES ARNOLD, TERRY L. GODDARD and CHARLES L. RYAN
Eric Michael Boles v. Vince Cullen
as 5:2010cv00943
Petitioner:
Eric Michael Boles
Respondent:
Vince Cullen
Eric Sydner v. Steve Thompson, et al
as 09-35887
Plaintiff - Appellant:
ERIC MICHAEL SYDNER
Defendant - Appellee:
STEVE THOMPSON, Director, CITY OF EVERETT and ASSOCIATION OF ATTORNEY'S FOR THE ACCUSED
Clark v. Schriro et al
as 3:2009cv08006
Petitioner:
Eric Michael Clark
Respondent:
Dora B. Schriro, James Arnold and Terry Goddard
Cause Of Action: Federal Question
Sydner v. Thompson et al
as 2:2008cv01659
Plaintiff:
Eric Michael Sydner
Defendant:
Steve Thompson, City of Everett and Association of Attorney's for the Accused
Cause Of Action: Federal Question
Sydner v. Thompson et al
as 2:2008cv01148
Plaintiff:
Eric Michael Synder
Defendant:
Steve Thompson and Everett Municipal Court
Cause Of Action: Federal Question
Phillips v. Quarterman
as 08-40220
Petitioner - Appellant:
ERIC MICHAEL PHILLIPS
Respondent - Appellee:
NATHANIEL QUARTERMAN, DIRECTOR, TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE, CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTIONS DIVISION
Clark v. Coconino County et al
as 3:2008cv08010
Petitioner:
Eric Michael Clark
Respondent:
Coconino County and Terry Goddard
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Phillips v. Quarterman
as 3:2007cv00013
Petitioner:
Eric Michael Phillips
Respondent:
Nathaniel Quarterman
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Joseph v. Director of Circle K, et al
as 2:1997cv02214
Plaintiff:
Roy Stephen Joseph
Defendant:
Director of the Circle K Corporation, Owner or Manager of the Circle K Convenience Market, Director of the Phoenix Security International, Inc. and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
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.
