Cases 1 - 10 of 25
Nelson v. Joyce et al
as 9:2023cv00153
Plaintiff:
Edward B. Nelson
Defendant:
Daniel Robert Joyce and Does A-Z
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Auto Negligence
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2023cv00277
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Frary v. Ahern
as 3:2022cv06058
Plaintiff:
Daniel Robert Frary
Defendant:
Gregory J. Ahern
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Frary v. Ahern
as 3:2022cv02579
Plaintiff:
Daniel Robert Frary
Defendant:
Gregory J. Ahern
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Daniel Witczak v. Jared Lozano, et al
as 21-16475
Plaintiff / Appellant:
DANIEL ROBERT WITCZAK
Defendant / Appellee:
JARED D. LOZANO, TAMMY FOSS, J. MENDOZA and others
Broadous v. City of Portland et al
as 3:2021cv00771
Defendant:
John Doe and Nicholas Morales
3Rd Party Plaintiff:
City of Portland
Plaintiff:
Melvin Broadous
3Rd Party Defendant:
Daniel Robert Rowland
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Masters v. Saul
as 3:2021cv00002
Plaintiff:
Daniel Robert Masters
Defendant:
Andrew Saul
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 0405 id
River City Testing, et al v. Jack Cohen, et al
as 5:2020cv02198
Defendant:
Craig Rush, Eric France, Jack Cohen and others
Plaintiff:
River City Testing, Stephen Potter and Rob Schumacher
Alternative Dispute Resolution (Adr) Provider:
Daniel Roberts
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441 Notice of Removal - Civil Rights Act
Witczak v. Lozano et al
as 4:2020cv01566
Defendant:
Tammy Foss, V. Muro, Villalodos-Caballero and others
Plaintiff:
Daniel Robert Witczak
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Jose Diaz v. United States of America et al
as 2:2019cv04653
Plaintiff:
Jose Diaz and Jose Diaz Martinez
Defendant:
United States Postal Service, Does 1 to 20, inclusive, Daniel Robert Power and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1346
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.
