Cases 121 - 130 of 1,985
Dawson v. Buckner et al (MAG+)
as 3:2023cv00431
Plaintiff:
Megan E. Dawson
Defendant:
Nancy Buckner, Allison Bryars, Stephanie Glispee and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2023cv02548
Not Classified By Court:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000 e Job Discrimination (Employment)
Rote v. Oregon Judicial Department et al
as 3:2023cv01016
Plaintiff:
Timothy Rote and Timothy C. Rote
Defendant:
Oregon Judicial Department, Oregon State Bar Professional Liability Fund, Hon. Meagan Flynn and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Kyte v. State of Oregon
as 23-1221
Plaintiff / Appellant:
MEGAN KYTE
Defendant / Appellee:
STATE OF OREGON
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 8:2023cv01201
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441 Notice of Removal - Civil Rights Act
Michael Carter v. Megan Hayes, et al
as 23-2200
Plaintiff / Appellant:
MICHAEL CARTER
Defendant / Appellee:
MEGAN HAYES, Probation Officer and ADAMS COUNTY PROBATION DEPARTMENT
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2023cv00710
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000 e Job Discrimination (Employment)
Rose v. City of Monroe
as 3:2023cv00865
Plaintiff:
Megan Rose
Defendant:
City of Monroe, Monroe Police Dept, Ofc Spoon and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Kyte v. State of Oregon
as 1:2023cv01648
Plaintiff:
Megan Kyte
Defendant:
State of Oregon
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Reyna v. City of Santa Cruz et al
as 3:2023cv03121
Plaintiff:
Rhonda Reyna and Rhonda E Reyna
Defendant:
City of Santa Cruz, County of Santa Cruz, Santa Cruz County Sheriff Department and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights 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.
