Cases 41 - 50 of 51
Bailey v. Frost
as 3:2011cv00273
Plaintiff:
Edward Earl Bailey
Defendant:
Sarah Frost
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Fort v. Mauney et al
as 6:2010cv01407
Plaintiff:
Robert Earl Fort
Defendant:
Al Hannon, Doe Leavitt, A. Mauney and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
McCoy v. Becker et al
as 3:2009cv01208
Plaintiff:
Marvin Earl McCoy
Defendant:
Dr. J. Becker and Dr. McClain
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Duval v. Coursey et al
as 3:2009cv01065
Plaintiff:
Michael Earl Duval
Defendant:
Richard Coursey, Mrs. Clausan, Mr. Jewell and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
O'Dell v. Meyers
as 3:2009cv00245
Petitioner:
Robert Earl O'Dell
Respondent:
Paula Meyers
Cause Of Action: Federal Question
Allen v. Oregon Board of Parole and Post Prison Supervision
as 6:2008cv01047
Petitioner:
Earl Allen
Respondent:
Oregon Board of Parole and Post Prison Supervision
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Cottingham v. Thomas
as 3:2008cv01034
Petitioner:
Steven Earl Cottingham
Respondent:
J.E. Thomas
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition Writ of Habeas Corpus (Federal)
Earls v. Belleque et al
as 3:2008cv00760
Petitioner:
Jesse Floyd Earls
Respondent:
Brian Belleque and Oregon Board of Parole and Post-Prison Supervision
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Thompson v. Oregon Department of Corrections et al
as 3:2008cv00430
Plaintiff:
Terry Earl Harvey Thompson
Defendant:
Oregon Department of Corrections, Garth Gulick, Ms. Rood-Inman and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Fort v. Ransier et al
as 6:2007cv01810
Plaintiff:
Robert Earl Fort
Defendant:
G. Ransier, W. McMillen, Guy Hall and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
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.
