Cases 1 - 10 of 23
Osborne v. Warden
as 1:2024cv00134
Petitioner:
Robert Louis Gray Osborne
Respondent:
Warden
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federal)
Osborne v. Warden
as 1:2023cv00531
Petitioner:
Robert Louis Gray Osborne
Respondent:
Warden
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federal)
Osborne v. Warden
as 1:2022cv00428
Petitioner:
Robert Louis Gray Osborne
Respondent:
Warden
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federal)
Mack et al v. Gilead Sciences, Inc.
as 4:2020cv04734
Plaintiff:
Kevin E. McCarthy, Michelle Collette Walker, Freeman E. Thompson, Jr. and others
Defendant:
Gilead Sciences, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
GRAY v. 3M COMPANY et al
as 7:2020cv32427
Defendant:
AEARO HOLDING LLC, AEARO INTERMEDIATE LLC, AEARO TECHNOLOGIES LLC and others
Plaintiff:
STEPHEN LOUIS GRAY
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Richard Gray v. Charles Ryan, et al
as 19-17422
Petitioner / Appellant:
RICHARD LOUIS GRAY
Respondent / Appellee:
DAVID SHINN, Warden, Director of the Arizona Department of Corrections and ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR THE STATE OF ARIZONA
Respondent:
CHARLES L. RYAN, Director, Arizona Department of Corrections
Richard Gray v. David Foster, et al
as 17-17228
Plaintiff - Appellant:
RICHARD LOUIS GRAY
Defendant - Appellee:
DAVID FOSTER, PEGGY WU, SURI GUNTAKA REDDY and others
Richard Gray v. Charles Ryan, et al
as 17-17050
Petitioner - Appellant:
RICHARD LOUIS GRAY
Respondent - Appellee:
CHARLES L. RYAN and ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR THE STATE OF ARIZONA
Gray #282846 v. Ryan et al
as 2:2017cv00963
Petitioner:
Richard Louis Gray
Respondent:
Charles Ryan and Attorney General of the State of Arizona
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Gray v. USA
as 3:2012cv01020
Respondent:
USA
Petitioner:
Roderick Louis Gray
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255
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.
