Cases 1 - 10 of 20
Stewart v. Stewart et al
as 5:2023cv02951
Plaintiff:
Thomas Stewart, Jr
Defendant:
Jeremy Stewart, Karen Tuttle, Stephen Duncan and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr (Other)
Thomas Stewart, Jr. v. Arizona, State of, et al
as 23-15173
Plaintiff / Appellant:
THOMAS STEWART, Jr.
Defendant / Appellee:
ARIZONA, STATE OF, MARICOPA, COUNTY OF, D SHELL RYAN, #09838 and others
Stewart v. Arizona, State of et al
as 2:2022cv00712
Plaintiff:
Thomas Stewart, Jr.
Defendant:
Arizona, State of and Maricopa, County of
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
STEWART v. DISTRICT ATTORNEY JACK STOLLSTEIMER et al
as 2:2020cv04005
Petitioner:
CARL THOMAS STEWART, JR.
Respondent:
DISTRICT ATTORNEY JACK STOLLSTEIMER and WARDEN GWHCF
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241
Thomas Stewart, Jr. v. Charles Ryan
as 17-73249
Petitioner:
THOMAS STEWART, Jr.
Respondent:
CHARLES L. RYAN, Warden
Thomas Stewart, Jr. v. Charles Ryan, et al
as 17-16247
Petitioner - Appellant:
THOMAS STEWART, Jr.
Respondent - Appellee:
CHARLES L. RYAN and ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF ARIZONA
Thomas Stewart, Jr. v. Charles Ryan, et al
as 17-15133
Plaintiff - Appellant:
THOMAS STEWART, Jr.
Defendant - Appellee:
CHARLES L. RYAN, UNKNOWN LOCKHART, named as Dr. Lockhart, KAREN BARCKLAY-DODSON, named as Dr. K. Barcklay-Dodson and others
Thomas Stewart, Jr. v. Derek Booth, et al
as 16-16431
Plaintiff - Appellant:
THOMAS STEWART, Jr.
Defendant - Appellee:
DEREK BOOTH, UNKNOWN SHOEMAKER, CHARLES L. RYAN and others
STEWART v. WETZEL et al
as 2:2016cv00340
Plaintiff:
CARL THOMAS STEWART, JR.
Defendant:
JOHN E. WETZEL, ROBERT GILMORE, MILLER and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Stewart v. Booth et al
as 2:2016cv00590
Plaintiff:
Thomas Stewart, Jr.
Defendant:
Derek Booth, Unknown Shoemaker, Charles L Ryan and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Federal Question: Bivens Act
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.
