Dillard v. The State of Oregon et al
| C. Gordon Dillard |
| Stephen Campbell, The State of Oregon, Jeffrey Gaunt, Joe Henner, Josephine County, Ellen Rosenblum, Michael Sanchez, The City of Grants Pass and James Brissette |
| 1:2013cv00373 |
| March 5, 2013 |
| US District Court for the District of Oregon |
| Medford (1) Office |
| Mark D. Clarke |
| Civil Rights: Other |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 Civil Rights Act |
| Both |
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing
71
ORDER: Adopting Magistrate Judge Clarke's Report and Recommendation 63 . Granting Motion to Dismiss 57 ; Granting 58 Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim and dismissing plaintiff's amended complaint 56 with prejudice. IT IS SO ORDERED. Signed on 5/6/2014 by Judge Owen M. Panner. (dkj)
|
|
Filing
42
ORDER: Adopting Magistrate Judge Clarke's Report and Recommendation 35 ; Granting Defendant's Motion to Dismiss 22 . Plaintiff's claims are dismissed with prejudice, except the claims for search and seizure violations and malicious prosecution, which are dismissed without prejudice. Plaintiff may file an amended complaint within thirty days. Signed on 10/8/2013 by Magistrate Judge Mark D. Clarke. (dkj) Modified on 10/9/2013 to correct signature date (dkj).
|
|
Filing
6
Order Regarding Payment of Filing Fee or filing an IFP. Signed on 03/07/2013 by Magistrate Judge Mark D. Clarke. (rsm)
|
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
Access this case on the Oregon District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
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.
