Cases 11 - 19 of 19
Arthur Coleman v. Sheriff Joe Arpaio et al
as 8:2010cv00108
Respondent:
Sheriff Joe Arpaio, Attorney General of the state of California, Edmund G. Brown, Jr. and others
Petitioner:
Arthur Coleman
Coleman v. Arpaio et al
as 3:2010cv00101
Petitioner:
Arthur Coleman
Respondent:
Joe Arpaio, Orange County Public Defenders Office and Attorney General of the State of California
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
COLEMAN v. ARPAIO et al
as 2:2009cv06308
Petitioner:
ARTHUR COLEMAN
Respondent:
JOE ARPAIO, STATE OF NEW JERSEY and ANNE MILGRAM
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Behm et al v. Medtronic, Inc. et al
as 0:2009cv02580
Plaintiff:
William P. Behm, William P. Behm, William P. Behm and others
Defendant:
Medtronic, Inc., Medtronic International Technology, Inc. and Medtronic Puerto Rico Operations Co.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 -pip-Diversity-Personal Injury, Product Liability
Type:
Other Statutes
Behm et al v. Medtronic, Inc. et al
as 4:2009cv02728
Plaintiff:
William P. Behm, Darlene Kay Bell, Angelo P. Bennice and others
Defendant:
Medtronic, Inc., Medtronic International Technology, Inc. and Medtronic Puerto Rico Operations Co.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Product Liability
Arthur Coleman v. E. Bazzle
as 09-6646
Petitioner - Appellant:
ARTHUR COLEMAN
Respondent - Appellee:
E. RICHARD BAZZLE, Warden
Arthur Coleman v. National Service Industries, Inc, et al.
as PAE/2:08-CV-83642
Defendant:
National Service Industries, Inc
Plaintiff:
Arthur Coleman
COLEMAN v. NATIONAL SERVICE INDUSTRIES, INC. et al
as 2:2008cv83642
Plaintiff:
ARTHUR COLEMAN
Defendant:
NATIONAL SERVICE INDUSTRIES, INC., AMERICAN STANDARD, INC., ANCHOR PACKING CO. and others
Cause Of Action: Diversity
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2007cv02459
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1601 Truth in Lending
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.
