Johnson v. Williams et al
| Casey Lee Johnson |
| Max Williams, Stan Czerniak, Brian Belleque, Brandon Kelly, Daryl Ruthuen, Donald Dravis, Ted Randell and Arthur Tolan |
| 3:2007cv01659 |
| November 5, 2007 |
| US District Court for the District of Oregon |
| Portland Office |
| Marion |
| Garr M. King |
| Prisoner: Civil Rights |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights |
| None |
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
95
Opinion and Order - Defendants' Motion to Dismiss 92 is granted in part and denied in part. Signed on 7/23/2010 by Judge Garr M. King. (mja)
|
|
Filing
91
OPINION and ORDER re Motion for Preliminary Injunction 65 : Johnson's Motion For Preliminary Injunction is denied. Based on the foregoing conclusions, the court will entertain a motion to dismiss from defendants. Signed on 11/24/09 by Judge Garr M. King. (tomg)
|
|
Filing
85
ORDER. Based on the foregoing, plaintiff's motion to compel 73 and defendants' motion to stay 80 are DENIED. Defendants shall file their opposition to plaintiff's pending motion for preliminary injunction 65 within 11 day s of the date of this order. Plaintiff may file a reply within 11 days thereafter. Plaintiff's motion for preliminary injunction 65 shall be taken under advisement on August 24, 2009. IT IS SO ORDERED. Signed on 7/24/09 by Judge Garr M. King. (pvh)
|
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.
