Anderson et. al v. Multnomah County

Justia Dockets & Filings Ninth Circuit Oregon District Court Anderson et. al v. Multnomah County

Anderson et. al v. Multnomah County

Case Number:	3:2020cv00555
Filed:	July 6, 2022
Court:	U.S. District Court for the District of Oregon
Office:	Portland (3) Office
Nature of Suit:	Civil Rights: Other
Cause of Action:	28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question

Follow case documents by RSS

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:

Date Filed	Document Text
January 27, 2025	Filing 94 OPINION AND ORDER: Upon de novo review, the Court ADOPTS without modification the F&R (ECF 80 ) in full. Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment (ECF 54 ) is GRANTED. IT IS SO ORDERED. Signed on 1/27/2025 by Judge Amy M. Baggio. (pvh)
July 6, 2022	Filing 40 ORDER: The Court ADOPTS Magistrate Judge You's Findings and Recommendation, ECF No. 28 . Therefore, Defendant's motion to dismiss, ECF 18 , is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part. Defendant's motion to dismiss based on lack of subject matter jurisdiction (mootness) is GRANTED, and the motion to dismiss based on failure to state a claim is DENIED as to the First Amendment retaliation claim asserted by plaintiff Anderson and plaintiff Te, (2) GRANTED as to the First Amendme nt retaliation claim asserted by plaintiff De La Torre - Guerrero and plaintiff Willmschen, (3) GRANTED as to the free speech and due process claims for damages asserted under the Oregon Constitution, and (4) GRANTED as to the due process claims asserted by all plaintiffs under the U.S. Constitution. IT IS SO ORDERED. Signed on 7/6/2022 by Judge Marco A. Hernandez. (pvh)

Date Filed

Document Text

January 27, 2025

Filing 94 OPINION AND ORDER: Upon de novo review, the Court ADOPTS without modification the F&R (ECF 80 ) in full. Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment (ECF 54 ) is GRANTED. IT IS SO ORDERED. Signed on 1/27/2025 by Judge Amy M. Baggio. (pvh)

July 6, 2022

Filing 40 ORDER: The Court ADOPTS Magistrate Judge You's Findings and Recommendation, ECF No. 28 . Therefore, Defendant's motion to dismiss, ECF 18 , is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part. Defendant's motion to dismiss based on lack of subject matter jurisdiction (mootness) is GRANTED, and the motion to dismiss based on failure to state a claim is DENIED as to the First Amendment retaliation claim asserted by plaintiff Anderson and plaintiff Te, (2) GRANTED as to the First Amendme nt retaliation claim asserted by plaintiff De La Torre - Guerrero and plaintiff Willmschen, (3) GRANTED as to the free speech and due process claims for damages asserted under the Oregon Constitution, and (4) GRANTED as to the due process claims asserted by all plaintiffs under the U.S. Constitution. IT IS SO ORDERED. Signed on 7/6/2022 by Judge Marco A. Hernandez. (pvh)

Access additional case information on PACER

Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the U.S. 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 this case: Anderson et. al v. Multnomah County
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]

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.

Why Is My Information Online?