Cases 1 - 10 of 15
Armstrong #314416 v. Ramos et al
as 2:2023cv02401
Plaintiff:
Kpou Armstrong
Defendant:
Alfred Ramos, Fransisco Hernandez and Mia Baldenegro
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Shaheed-Muhammad, #148986 v. Centurion Arizona et al
as 2:2021cv02103
Plaintiff:
Azuzallah Shaheed-Muhammad
Defendant:
Centurion Arizona, Unknown Stickley, Unknown Montez and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Getzen v. Shinn et al
as 4:2021cv00384
Plaintiff:
David Getzen
Defendant:
David Shinn, Mark Brnovich and Ben Armstrong
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Stevenson v. Arizona Department of Corrections et al
as 2:2021cv01308
Plaintiff:
Michael Scott Stevenson
Defendant:
Arizona Department of Corrections, Buckeye Police Department, John Armstrong and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Thompson v. Humetewa et al
as 2:2020cv02163
Plaintiff:
Richard Wayne Thompson
Defendant:
Diane J Humetewa, Michael T Morrissey and Benjamin A Armstrong
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
Quintero #339148 v. Armstrong et al
as 2:2020cv01647
Defendant:
Benjamin Armstrong, Lynn Fazz, Eugene Marquez and others
Plaintiff:
Oscar Quintero
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Armstrong v. Maricopa, County of et al
as 2:2019cv02656
Plaintiff:
Bradley P Armstrong
Defendant:
Maricopa County Sheriff's Office, Paul Penzone, Unknown Party and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Armstrong v. Ryan et al
as 2:2015cv01508
Petitioner:
Shad Daniel Armstrong
Respondent:
Charles L Ryan and James O'Neal
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Ptn for Writ of H/C - Stay of Execution
Armstrong v. Ryan et al
as 4:2015cv00358
Petitioner:
Shad Daniel Armstrong
Respondent:
Charles L Ryan and James O'Neal
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Armstrong v. Mitchell et al
as 2:2013cv01421
Plaintiff:
Andre William Armstrong
Defendant:
Tyrone Mitchell and James Logon
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.
