Cases 21 - 30 of 1,612
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2023cv02581
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1981 Sex Discrimination
Hursey #065273 v. Lamb et al
as 2:2023cv02457
Plaintiff:
Ronnie Hursey, Sr.
Defendant:
Mark Lamb, Unknown Schealnick, Unknown Alcantar and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Latham #152032 v. Gibson et al
as 2:2023cv02429
Plaintiff:
Tomas Latham
Defendant:
B Gibson and Mark T Lamb
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Lopez v. Gutierrez
as 4:2023cv00534
Petitioner:
Raul Lopez
Respondent:
Mark Gutierrez
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Federal)
Friddle v. CoreCivic et al
as 2:2023cv02414
Plaintiff:
Danny Friddle
Defendant:
CoreCivic, Todd Thomas, M Frink and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441 Petition for Removal- Civil Rights Act
Ramos v. Gutierrez
as 4:2023cv00527
Petitioner:
Luis Ramos
Respondent:
Mark Gutierrez
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Federal)
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 4:2023cv00500
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000 e Job Discrimination (Employment)
Mall v. Binkley et al
as 2:2023cv02240
Plaintiff:
Mark Anthony Mall
Defendant:
Rob Binkley doing business as EZ Homes Incorporated, Scott E Williams doing business as Zona Law Group, Tiffany & Bosco PA and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1981 Civil Rights
Whipple v. Maricopa, City of et al
as 2:2023cv02238
Plaintiff:
Nathan Whipple
Defendant:
Maricopa, City of, Maricopa Police Department, Mark Goodman and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441 Petition for Removal- Civil Rights Act
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2023cv02217
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 12101 Americans with Disabilities Act
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.
