Cases 1 - 10 of 33
Dunlap v. Arizona Office of the Attorney General, et al.
as 23-1758
Petitioner / Appellant:
LARRY DONNELL DUNLAP
Respondent / Appellee:
AGAZ - ARIZONA OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL and RYAN THORNELL, DIRECTOR OF THE ARIZONA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, REHABILITATION
Larry Dunlap v. Ryan Thornell, et al
as 23-15962
Petitioner / Appellant:
LARRY DONNELL DUNLAP
Respondent / Appellee:
DAVID SHINN, Director, RYAN THORNELL and ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR THE STATE OF ARIZONA
Larry Dunlap v. USDC-AZTIn re: Larry Dunlap v. USDC-AZT
as 23-70069
Not Classified By Court:
In re: LARRY DONNELL DUNLAP, DAVID SHINN, Director and ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR THE STATE OF ARIZONA
Petitioner:
LARRY DONNELL DUNLAP
Respondent:
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA, TUCSON
Dunlap #124173 v. Thomas et al
as 2:2023cv00666
Plaintiff:
Larry Donnell Dunlap
Defendant:
Siji Thomas, Karanja Adams, Ronald Stewart and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Dunlap v. Kimble
as 22-1847
Not Yet Classified:
AZ EYMAN LIBRARIAN
Petitioner:
LARRY DONNELL DUNLAP
Respondent:
JAMES KIMBLE, WARDEN
Dunlap #124173 v. Ducey et al
as 2:2022cv01305
Plaintiff:
Larry Donnell Dunlap
Defendant:
Douglas Ducey, David Shinn, Unknown Purden and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Dunlap #124173 v. United States Department of Treasury
as 2:2021cv02202
Plaintiff:
Larry Donnell Dunlap
Defendant:
United States Department of Treasury
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Dunlap #124173 v. Shinn et al
as 4:2021cv00457
Petitioner:
Larry Donnell Dunlap
Respondent:
David Shinn and Attorney General of the State of Arizona
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Larry Dunlap v. Walter Hensley
as 21-71325
Petitioner:
LARRY DONNELL DUNLAP
Respondent:
WALTER HENSLEY
Larry Dunlap v. Walter Hensley
as 21-71279
Petitioner:
LARRY DONNELL DUNLAP
Respondent:
WALTER HENSLEY
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.
