Cases 1 - 10 of 100
Michale Hoffman v. Daniel Jones, et al
as 26-13168
Plaintiff:
MICHALE HOFFMAN
Defendant:
DANIEL JONES, RALPH DEMPSEY REVELS, DAVID GRAY and others
Racklin v. The John Campbell Group et al
as 2:2026cv09688
Plaintiff:
Richard Racklin
Defendant:
The John Campbell Group and Revel Real Estate LLC
Cause Of Action: 47 U.S.C. § 227 Restrictions of Use of Telephone Equipment
Nicolo v. Walker et al
as 1:2026cv00247
Plaintiff:
Giancarlo Nicolo
Defendant:
Brian Walker, Bridgeverse Studios LLC, Revel Studios Inc. and others
Cause Of Action: 18 U.S.C. § 1961 Racketeering (RICO) Act
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 4:2026cv06459
Petitioner:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 5:2026cv04450
Petitioner:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Respondent:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 08 U.S.C. § 1105 (a) Aliens: Habeas Corpus to Release INS Detainee
NSS, Inc. et al v. Neuro Solutions 100, LLC
as 3:2026cv00576
Plaintiff:
NSS, Inc., Henry Doss, Tom Revels and others
Defendant:
Neuro Solutions 100, LLC
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Injunctive & Declaratory Relief
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2026cv00680
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 12112 Americans with Disabilities Act
Reveles v. Arizona, State of et al
as 2:2026cv04467
Plaintiff:
Syrina Reveles
Defendant:
Arizona, State of, Maricopa County Sheriff's Office, Maricopa County Estrella Jail and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Revell v. Becton Dickinson and Company et al
as 2:2026cv04293
Plaintiff:
William Decorris Revell
Defendant:
Becton Dickinson and Company, C R Bard Incorporated, Bard Access Systems Incorporated and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Product Liability
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.
