Cases 21 - 30 of 232
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2021cv05909
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
Carter v. Fleming et al
as 4:2021cv00688
Plaintiff:
Twanika Carter Carter and Twanika Carter
Counter Claimant:
Jacquniece Lashawn Fleming
Defendant:
Hira Singh, Terry Schoovner, Brian Bailey and others
Cause Of Action: 48 U.S.C. § 1985
Lu v. Budd, et al
as 21-1647
Plaintiff / Appellant:
FRIEDRICH LU
Defendant / Appellee:
KAREN LAFRAZIA, SAINT FRANCIS HOUSE, INC., KIMBERLY SUZANNE BUDD and others
Thomas Murphy v. USDC-ORE
as 21-71229
Not Classified By Court:
In re: THOMAS ROBERT MURPHY and UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Petitioner:
THOMAS ROBERT MURPHY
Respondent:
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON, EUGENE
Thomas Murphy v. BOP, et al
as 21-35662
Plaintiff / Appellant:
THOMAS ROBERT MURPHY
Defendant / Appellee:
FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS, NORTHWEST REGIONAL RE-ENTRY CENTER, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON, PORTLAND and others
USA v. Thomas Murphy
as 21-30179
Plaintiff / Appellee:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Defendant / Appellant:
THOMAS ROBERT MURPHY
Thomas Murphy v. Oregon Circuit Court, et al
as 21-35608
Petitioner / Appellant:
THOMAS ROBERT MURPHY
Respondent / Appellee:
OREGON CIRCUIT COURT, PRETRIAL/PROBATION OR PAROLE SERVICES, ROBERT CLIVE JONES, U.S. District Court Judge and others
Murphy v. Bureau of Prisons et al
as 3:2021cv01004
Plaintiff:
Thomas Robert Murphy
Defendant:
Bureau of Prisons, Northwest Regional Reentry Center, Oregon District Court and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Murphy v. Davol, Inc. et al
as 2:2021cv03534
Defendant:
Davol, Inc. and C.R. Bard, Inc.
Plaintiff:
Robert Murphy
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
USA v. Thomas Murphy
as 21-30095
Defendant / Appellant:
THOMAS ROBERT MURPHY
Plaintiff / Appellee:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
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.
