Cases 1 - 10 of 229
Hickam v. Commissioner Social Security Administration
as 6:2024cv00171
Plaintiff:
Jason Lee Hickam
Defendant:
Commissioner Social Security Administration
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 0405 g Review of Commissioner's Final Decision
Harris #113830 v. Thornell et al
as 2:2023cv01905
Petitioner:
Jason Lee Harris
Respondent:
Ryan Thornell, Attorney General of the State of Arizona and Unknown Party
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Harris v. Arizona Department of Corrections
as 2:2023cv01426
Plaintiff:
Jason Lee Harris
Defendant:
Arizona Department of Corrections
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Harris v. Maricopa County Superior Court
as 2:2023cv01169
Plaintiff:
Jason Lee Harris
Defendant:
Maricopa County Superior Court
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2023cv00909
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441 Petition for Removal - Fair Credit Reporting
Harris v. Penzone et al
as 2:2023cv00212
Petitioner:
Jason Lee Harris
Respondent:
Paul Penzone, Kristin K Mayes and Kris Mayes
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Federal)
Urban Jr. v. Cotton et al
as 1:2023cv00043
Plaintiff:
Tante Urban Jr.
Defendant:
Jason Lee Cotton, Vincent Kruse, Peter Stone and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Jason Harris v. County of Maricopa
as 23-15105
Plaintiff / Appellant:
JASON LEE HARRIS
Defendant / Appellee:
COUNTY OF MARICOPA
Jason Harris v. Maricopa County Superior Court
as 23-15037
Plaintiff / Appellant:
JASON LEE HARRIS
Defendant / Appellee:
MARICOPA COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT
Jason Harris v. Paul Penzone, et al
as 22-16991
Petitioner / Appellant:
JASON LEE HARRIS
Respondent / Appellee:
PAUL PENZONE, Sheriff and MARK BRNOVICH, Attorney General
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.
