Cases 21 - 30 of 43
Redzinak #273314 v. Ryan et al
as 4:2015cv00064
Petitioner:
Joshua Wayne Redzinak
Respondent:
Charles Ryan, Pima County Adult Probation Department and Attorney General of the State of Arizona
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
McManus v. Mohave County Probation Department et al
as 3:2014cv08209
Plaintiff:
Michael Eugene McManus
Defendant:
Mohave County Probation Department, Karen Ganley, Mohave County Prosecutor's Office and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
Montero v. Fischer et al
as 2:2014cv02285
Plaintiff:
Patrick Montero
Defendant:
Jeffrey Fischer and Maricopa County Adult Probation Department
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2014cv01704
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000
Burke v. Youhas et al
as 2:2014cv01691
Plaintiff:
Patrick Anthony Burke, Jr.
Defendant:
Dana Youhas, Kayla Cathcart and Adult Probation Department
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2014cv01418
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 2617
Geldarski v. Carl et al
as 2:2013cv01436
Plaintiff:
Andre Leon Geldarski
Defendant:
Debbie Carl and Gila County Probation Department
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Casteel #106031 v. Arizona Adult Probation Department et al
as 2:2013cv00637
Plaintiff:
Everett Gregory Casteel
Defendant:
Shane Neil, Gregory Preston, Maricopa, County of and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Cuen v. Granville et al
as 2:2012cv01926
Plaintiff:
Joe Cuen
Defendant:
Warren Granville, Nathaniel Carr, III, Robert Precht and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Moore v. Adult Probation Department et al
as 2:2012cv01467
Plaintiff:
Larry Lee Moore
Defendant:
Adult Probation Department, Melissa Froderman and Unknown Ryan
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
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.
