Cases 21 - 30 of 36
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2014cv08776
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Phiffer, Earl v. Hepp, Randall
as 3:2014cv00573
Petitioner:
Earl D. Phiffer
Respondent:
Randall Hepp
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Boshell v. Albrite Sales and Services, LLC et al
as 3:2013cv01322
Plaintiff:
Dustin Boshell
Defendant:
Albrite Sales and Services, LLC and Kenner Phiffer
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 5 (a) Fair Labor Standards Act
Earl Phiffer v. Michael Byron, et al
as 12-3252
Plaintiff - Appellant:
EARL DEWAYNE PHIFFER
Defendant - Appellee:
MICHAEL J. BYRON, Rock County Judge, MICHAEL R. FITZPATRICK, Rock County Judge, CHARLES P. DYKMAN, Dane County Judge and others
Billy Phiffer v. State of Oregon, et al
as 12-35550
Plaintiff - Appellant:
BILLY RAY PHIFFER, an individual
Defendant - Appellee:
STATE OF OREGON, as being represented by Baker County Circuit Court, a public entity, BAKER COUNTY DISTRICT ATTORNEY'S OFFICE and BAKER COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT
Phiffer, Earl v. Byron, Michael et al
as 3:2012cv00359
Plaintiff:
Earl Dewayne Phiffer
Defendant:
Michael J. Byron, Michael R. Fitzpatrick, Charles P. Dykman and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Felix et al v. Group Health of Washington et al
as 2:2011cv01974
Plaintiff:
Nathan Felix and Robin Felix
Defendant:
Group Health of Washington, Group Health Cooperative, Susan Egaas and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2011cv00425
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1983
Earl Phiffer v. Larry Jenkin
as 11-1418
Petitioner - Appellant:
EARL D. PHIFFER
Respondent - Appellee:
LARRY JENKINS
Phiffer v. Shirtcliff et al
as 2:2010cv01120
Defendant:
Baker County Circuit Court and Matthew B. Shirtcliff
Plaintiff:
Billy Ray Phiffer
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.
