Cases 1 - 10 of 17
Bennetti v. Thornell, et al.
as 25-2431
Petitioner:
DINO JOSEPH BENNETTI, also named Dino Bennetti
Respondent:
RYAN THORNELL, DIRECTOR OF THE ARIZONA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, REHABILITATION and ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF ARIZONA
Bennetti #085442 v. Thornell
as 2:2025cv00743
Plaintiff:
Dino Joseph Bennetti and Paul C Denatale
Defendant:
Ryan Thornell
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Bennetti #085442 v. Thornell et al
as 2:2025cv00169
Petitioner:
Dino Joseph Bennetti
Respondent:
Ryan Thornell and Attorney General of the State of Arizona
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Bennetti #085442 v. Thornell et al
as 2:2023cv02161
Petitioner:
Dino Joseph Bennetti and Paul C Dinatale
Respondent:
Ryan Thornell and Attorney General of the State of Arizona
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Bennetti #085442 v. Thornell et al
as 2:2023cv02151
Plaintiff:
Dino Joseph Bennetti
Defendant:
Ryan Thornell and Unknown Parties
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Bennetti #85442 v. Shinn et al
as 2:2021cv00897
Defendant:
Unknown Ramirez, David Shinn, Unknown Alvarez and others
Plaintiff:
Dino Joseph Bennetti
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Goff #186716 et al v. Trinity Services Group et al
as 2:2021cv00670
Plaintiff:
Cleveland Yarrow Cook, Tonatihu Aguilar, Steven A Benavidez and others
Defendant:
Amber Puckett, Trinity Services Group, David Shinn and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Bennetti #085442 v. Trinity Services Group et al
as 2:2021cv00705
Defendant:
William R Thomas, Amber Puckett, Trinity Services Group and others
Plaintiff:
Dino Joseph Bennetti
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Bennetti #85442 v. Rand et al
as 2:2020cv02425
Defendant:
Johnathan Cameron, Lucy Rand, Unknown Coleman and others
Plaintiff:
Dino Joseph Bennetti
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.
