Cases 31 - 40 of 40
Collins v. Alameda County Superior Court
as 3:2012cv02072
Petitioner:
Michael E. Collins
Respondent:
Alameda County Superior Court
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Collins v. Valley Metro Rail Incorporated et al
as 2:2011cv01648
Plaintiff:
Michael Edward Collins
Defendant:
Valley Metro Rail Incorporated, Hillary Foose and Unknown Parties
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Michael Collins v. Tucson Fire Department, et al
as 11-15009
Plaintiff - Appellant:
MICHAEL EDWARD COLLINS, AKA Michael Collins
Defendant - Appellee:
TUCSON FIRE DEPARTMENT, TUCSON POLICE DEPARTMENT, UNKNOWN PARTIES, named as unknown, will supplement later 1-6 and others
Michael Collins v. Joseph Arpaio
as 10-17837
Plaintiff - Appellant:
MICHAEL EDWARD COLLINS, AKA Michael Collins
Defendant - Appellee:
JOSEPH M. ARPAIO
Collins v. Tucson Fire Department et al
as 4:2010cv00518
Plaintiff:
Michael Edward Collins
Defendant:
Unknown Parties, Pima County Tucson Fire Department and Pima County Tucson Police Department
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Collins v. Arpaio
as 2:2010cv01792
Plaintiff:
Michael Edward Collins
Defendant:
Joseph M Arpaio
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Poznanski v. Rice et al
as 2:2009cv02981
Plaintiff:
Jan P. Poznanski
Defendant:
Kathleen M. Rice, Michael P. Collins and Tammi Pere
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Poznanski v. Rice et al
as 1:2009cv05727
Plaintiff:
Jan P. Poznanski
Defendant:
Kathleen M. Rice, Michael P. Collins and Tammi Pere, Esq.
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Collins v. Jasper et al
as 1:2007cv02085
Plaintiff:
Michael Allen Collins
Defendant:
Jasper, Maddox, Sanchez and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Collins v. Norris
as 5:2007cv00117
Plaintiff:
Michael T Collins
Defendant:
Larry Norris
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
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.
