Cases 1 - 10 of 107
Ranger v. Thornell, et al.
as 25-1572
Petitioner:
CLAUDE RANGER, III
Respondent:
RYAN THORNELL, DIRECTOR OF THE ARIZONA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, REHABILITATION and ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF ARIZONA
Leeman v. Thornell, et al.
as 25-1419
Petitioner:
ANGELA RENE LEEMAN
Respondent:
RYAN THORNELL, DIRECTOR OF THE ARIZONA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, REHABILITATION and ARIZONA OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL
Duke v. Thornell, et al.
as 25-1420
Petitioner:
BRENT FITZGERALD DUKE
Respondent:
RYAN THORNELL, DIRECTOR OF THE ARIZONA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, REHABILITATION and ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF ARIZONA
Horton v. Shinn, et al.
as 25-1322
Plaintiff:
TONY HORTON
Defendant:
DAVID SHINN, JOHN MCADOREY, WARDEN, UNKNOWN TOWN, D/W Cibola Unit and others
Ranger v. Thornell, et al.
as 25-1166
Petitioner:
CLAUDE RANGER, III
Respondent:
RYAN THORNELL, DIRECTOR OF THE ARIZONA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, REHABILITATION and ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF ARIZONA
Finkel v. NaphCare, Inc., et al.
as 25-1102
Plaintiff:
BRIAN LESLIE FINKEL
Defendant:
NAPHCARE, INC., CENTURION OF ARIZONA, LLC, SHANTHA KUMAR, MD and others
Hall v. Arizona State Prison Complex - Tucson, et al.
as 25-1104
Plaintiff:
ANTHONY CHARLES HALL
Defendant:
ARIZONA STATE PRISON COMPLEX - TUCSON, UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE, ARIZONA COURT OF APPEALS and others
King v. Thornell, et al.
as 25-744
Petitioner:
FREDERICK KING, JR.
Respondent:
RYAN THORNELL, DIRECTOR OF THE ARIZONA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, REHABILITATION and KRISTIN MAYES, Attorney General of the State of Arizona
Richardson v. Thornell, et al.
as 25-683
Petitioner:
DAMON ELI RICHARDSON
Respondent:
RYAN THORNELL, DIRECTOR OF THE ARIZONA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, REHABILITATION and ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF ARIZONA
Wright v. Thornell, et al.
as 25-532
Petitioner:
MONTEZ LAVELL WRIGHT, III
Respondent:
RYAN THORNELL, DIRECTOR OF THE ARIZONA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, REHABILITATION and ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF ARIZONA
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.
