Cases 1 - 10 of 10
Wrobel v. Hardesty, et al.
as 24-1658
Plaintiff:
ANTHONY WROBEL
Defendant:
HARDESTY, PARRAQUIRRE, CADISH and others
Wrobel v. Hardesty et al
as 2:2023cv00969
Plaintiff:
Anthony Wrobel
Defendant:
Hardesty, Parraquirre, Cadish and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
John Arpino v. Michael Cherry, et al
as 18-16020
Plaintiff - Appellant:
JOHN FRANCIS ARPINO
Defendant - Appellee:
MICHAEL A. CHERRY, MARK GIBBONS, JAMES W. HARDESTY and others
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 18-15918
Plaintiff - Appellant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant - Appellee:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
John Arpino v. USDC-NVR
as 18-71228
:
In re: JOHN FRANCIS ARPINO
Petitioner:
JOHN FRANCIS ARPINO, AKA Johnny Bullets
Respondent:
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEVADA, RENO
Real Party In Interest:
MICHAEL A. CHERRY, MARK GIBBONS, JAMES W. HARDESTY and others
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2018cv00162
Petitioner:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Respondent:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1361 Petition for Writ of Mandamus
John Arpino v. Michael Cherry, et al
as 18-15616
Plaintiff - Appellant:
JOHN FRANCIS ARPINO
Defendant - Appellee:
MICHAEL A. CHERRY, MARK GIBBONS, JAMES W. HARDESTY and others
Arpino v. Cherry et al
as 2:2017cv02266
Petitioner:
John Francis Arpino
Respondent:
Judge Janet J Berry, Chief Justice Michael A Cherry, Nathan Edwards and others
Cause Of Action: Civil Miscellaneous Case
Arpino v. Cherry et al
as 3:2017cv00527
Petitioner:
John Francis Arpino
Respondent:
Judge Janet J Berry, Chief Justice Michael A Cherry, Nathan Edwards and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights
Olausen v. Cox et al
as 3:2014cv00315
Respondent:
Board of Nevada Prison Commissioners, Chery, Catherine Cortez-Masto and others
Petitioner:
John Steven Olausen
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
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.
