Cases 61 - 70 of 116
Hempfling et al v. Stanford et al
as 2:2015cv02268
Plaintiff:
Lee Kent Hempfling and Suesie Kent Hempfling
Defendant:
Amanda Stanford and Lynn Hurley
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Orozco #260141 v. Ryan et al
as 2:2015cv02026
Plaintiff:
Luis Felipe Orozco
Defendant:
Charles L Ryan, Corizon Health Incorporated, Michael Hegmann and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Holcomb #091014 v. Ryan et al
as 4:2015cv00379
Petitioner:
Kent Return Holcomb
Respondent:
Charles L Ryan and Attorney General of the State of Arizona
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2015cv01590
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 621
Hempfling et al v. Stanford et al
as 2:2015cv01475
Plaintiff:
Lee Kent Hempfling and Suesie Kent Hempfling
Defendant:
Amanda Stanford, Lynn Hurley and Pinal County Superior Court
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Chapman # 229191 v. Ryan et al
as 2:2015cv01302
Plaintiff:
James Ward Chapman, III
Defendant:
Charles L Ryan, Corizon Health Incorporated, Michael Hegmann and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Ferguson #235832 v. Ryan et al
as 2:2015cv01207
Plaintiff:
Harold Edwin Ferguson
Defendant:
Charles L Ryan, Corizon Health Incorporated, Michael Hegmann and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Dutcher #067784 v. Ryan
as 2:2015cv01079
Plaintiff:
Robert William Dutcher
Defendant:
Charles L Ryan, Terry Stewart, Samuel Lewis and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Hawkins v. Colvin
as 4:2015cv00237
Plaintiff:
Kent Cameron Hawkins
Defendant:
Carolyn W Colvin
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 405
United States Securities and Exchange Commission v. Janus Spectrum LLC et al
as 2:2015cv00609
Defendant:
Janus Spectrum LLC, David Alcorn, Kent Maerki and others
Plaintiff:
United States Securities and Exchange Commission
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 77
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.
