Cases 11 - 20 of 22
Flores v. McGee et al
as 2:2020cv01782
Defendant:
Susan Washburn, Jane & John Does, Lt. D. Lindholm and others
Plaintiff:
Santos L. Flores
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Flores et al v. Schwartz et al
as 3:2020cv00430
Defendant:
Luther Schwartz, Justin Morgan, Robin May and others
Plaintiff:
Richard J. Flores and Wendi D. Flores
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2014cv01720
Respondent:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Petitioner:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition Writ of Habeas Corpus (Federal)
Flores v. Nooth
as 2:2014cv01415
Petitioner:
Ernest Steven Flores
Respondent:
Mark Nooth
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Hall v. Garrett et al
as 3:2012cv00361
Defendant:
Deputy R. Aldin, Dr. Blum, (OSP) Sgt. M. Bowersox and others
Plaintiff:
Stanley Hall
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Woodroffe v. State of Oregon et al
as 2:2012cv00124
Defendant:
Cpl. Adamson, Walter M. Beglau, Brian Beleque and others
Plaintiff:
Robert Woodroffe
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Flores v. Schrunk et al
as 3:2011cv01229
Defendant:
Glen Banfield and Micheal D. Schrunk
Plaintiff:
David Constancio Flores
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2011cv00355
Petitioner:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
503) 326-5524 (fax:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Respondent:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition Writ of Habeas Corpus (Federal)
Jones v. Nooth et al
as 3:2010cv00760
Defendant:
Jason Bell, Jane Doe, P. Flores and others
Plaintiff:
Clarence Eugene Jones
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Flores v. Belleque
as 3:2008cv06153
Petitioner:
David Flores
Respondent:
Brian Belleque
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
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.
