Cases 11 - 20 of 20
Murphy v. Oregon Medical Board et al
as 3:2014cv01135
Defendant:
Jane Doe, John Doe, Nita Goss and others
Plaintiff:
James Michael Murphy, MD
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Dover v. Haley et al
as 3:2013cv01360
Defendant:
25 Jane Does, 25 John Does, ALJ Rick Barber and others
Plaintiff:
MD Eric A. Dover
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Ogle v. Yates et al
as 3:2012cv00571
Defendant:
50 Jane Does, 50 John Does, Carolyn Alexander and others
Plaintiff:
David J. Ogle
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Gambee v. Cornelius et al
as 6:2010cv06265
Defendant:
D.P.M. Lisa A. Cornelius, M.D. Donald Girard, M.D. Linda B. Johnson and others
Plaintiff:
M.D. John Edwin Gambee
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Smith v. Warren
as 3:2010cv00838
Plaintiff:
Kaysam Kent Smith
Defendant:
Earnest Warren, Jr.
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Wrenn et al v. Murphy et al
as 6:2010cv06095
Defendant:
Benton County Circuit Court, Barbara M. Dilaconi, Kathleen A. Evans and others
Plaintiff:
Michael M. Martinez, Jeffrey G. Sharp and Jerry Jay Wrenn
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2201 Declaratory Judgment
Womack v. McTeague et al
as 2:2010cv00332
Defendant:
Dominga Guerrero, Steven Koc, Lori Lindley and others
Plaintiff:
Dr. Terry Womack
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 6:2008cv06053
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question: Employment Discrimination
Baer v. Federal Express Corporation
as 6:2007cv06301
Plaintiff:
Kent Baer
Defendant:
Federal Express Corporation
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Petition for Removal
Martin v. Howe
as 6:2007cv06260
Plaintiff:
Thomas J Martin
Defendant:
Kent D. Howe
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.
