Cases 21 - 30 of 105
Cuevas v. Fhuere
as 6:2023cv00365
Petitioner:
Santos Cuevas
Respondent:
Corey Fhuere
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Krochmal v. Fhuere
as 6:2023cv00290
Petitioner:
Nicholas Krochmal, Jr.
Respondent:
Corey Fhuere
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Smith v. Fhuere
as 3:2023cv00258
Plaintiff:
Ronnie Smith
Defendant:
Corey Fhuere, Katy Coba, A. Kidwell and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Hayes v. Brown et al
as 6:2023cv00109
Plaintiff:
Robert Patrick Hayes
Defendant:
Kate Brown, Corey Fhuere, Heidi Steward and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Pearson v. Fhuere et al
as 6:2023cv00045
Petitioner:
Chad Samuel William Pearson
Respondent:
Corey Fhuere, Attorney General of the State of Oregon and Ellen Rosenblum
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Windham v. Dept. of Agriculture
as 6:2022cv01919
Plaintiff:
Corey E. Windham
Defendant:
Dept. of Agriculture
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Windham v. Central Intelligence Agency
as 6:2022cv01918
Plaintiff:
Corey Windham
Defendant:
Central Intelligence Agency
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Oregon Coast Bank v. Granville, O.N. 241539 et al
as 6:2022cv01887
Plaintiff:
Oregon Coast Bank
Defendant:
In Rem GRANVILLE, O.N. 241539, in personam FV Granville, LLC, In Personam Corey C Feldner and others
Cause Of Action: 46 U.S.C. § 31322 Mortgage Act of 1920
Silva v. Fhuere
as 6:2022cv01886
Petitioner:
Brandon Michael Silva
Respondent:
Corey Fhuere
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2022cv01865
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1681 Fair Credit Reporting 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.
