Cases 1 - 9 of 9
McAllister v. Ryan et al
as 2:2019cv00614
Defendant:
Arizona, State of, Lance Hetmer, Esiquiel Aguilar and others
Plaintiff:
Jonathan McAllister, Sr.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441
McAllister v. Ryan et al
as 2:2018cv04670
Respondent:
Arizona, State of, Carla G Hacker-Payne, Lance Hetmer and others
Petitioner:
Jonathan McAllister, Sr.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441
Jonathan McAllister, Sr. v. Paul Penzone, et al
as 17-17469
Plaintiff - Appellant:
JONATHAN MCALLISTER, Sr.
Defendant - Appellee:
PAUL PENZONE, Maricopa County Sheriff's Office, UNKNOWN ALVEREZ, Dr., Director of Arizona County Correctional Health Services, UNKNOWN GRIMM, Lt., Acting Jail Commander and others
McAllister v. Penzone et al
as 2:2017cv02884
Plaintiff:
Jonathan McAllister, Sr.
Defendant:
Paul Penzone, Unknown Alverez, Unknown Grimm and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
McAllister v. Ryan et al
as 2:2013cv01042
Petitioner:
Jonathan McAllister, Sr.
Respondent:
Charles L Ryan and Attorney General of the State of Arizona
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Jonathan McAllister, Sr. v. Bette Carrillo, et al
as 12-17625
Plaintiff - Appellant:
JONATHAN MCALLISTER, Sr.
Defendant - Appellee:
BETTE CARRILLO, PAUL LOUIS, RON SCHMIDT and others
Jonathan McAllister, Sr. v. Preston
as 12-16672
Petitioner - Appellant:
JONATHAN MCALLISTER, Sr.
Defendant - Appellee:
PRESTON, Licensed Practitioner, Nurse at ADC/ASPC Eyman-Meadows Unit
McAllister v. Carrillo et al
as 4:2012cv00395
Plaintiff:
Jonathan McAllister, Sr.
Defendant:
Bette Carrillo , Paul Louis , Ron Schmidt and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441
McAllister v. Arizona Department of Corrections et al
as 2:2010cv02638
Plaintiff:
Jonathan McAllister, Sr
Defendant:
Arizona Department of Corrections, Charles L Ryan, Rita Frigo 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.
