Cases 1 - 9 of 9
Timothy Lepesh v. Amy Pinkley-Wernz, et al
as 20-35052
Defendant / Appellee:
JANELL ROCHESTER, at SRCI, NATE LOWE, OSP, R. GOLDSTON, Inspector and others
Plaintiff / Appellant:
TIMOTHY V. LEPESH
Defendant:
BRANDON KELLY, Superintendent at O.S.P., MELISSA A. GILBERT, AKA M. Davidson, JEFF PRIMO and others
Sirgiorgio Clardy v. Greg Jones, et al
as 18-35006
Plaintiff - Appellant:
SIRGIORGIO SANFORD CLARDY
Defendant - Appellee:
GREG JONES, COLETTE PETERS, MICHAEL F. GOWER and others
Lepesh v. Davidson et al
as 6:2017cv00648
Defendant:
Melisa Davidson, J. Nofziger and A. Pinkley-Wernz
Plaintiff:
Timothy V. Lepesh
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Clardy v. Jones et al
as 2:2017cv00178
Defendant:
Richard Adams, Matthew Barba, Jason Bell and others
Plaintiff:
Sir Giorgio Sanford Clardy
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Young v. State of Oregon et al
as 6:2016cv01112
Defendant:
Ms. C. Lenex, Mark Nooth, Oregon Department of Corrections and others
Plaintiff:
Matthew Young
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Barrett v. Peters et al
as 6:2016cv01073
Plaintiff:
Jacob Barrett
Defendant:
Jimmy Coker, M. Davidson, Julie Jones and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Caldwell v. Premo et al
as 6:2015cv01934
Defendant:
Alvis, Tom Byerly, Contreras and others
Plaintiff:
Danny Ray Caldwell
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Barletta v. Premo et al
as 6:2015cv00672
Plaintiff:
John C. Barletta
Defendant:
Correctional Officer M. Hannon, Greg Jones, B. Kelly and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Ray v. State of Oregon et al
as 3:2007cv00220
Plaintiff:
Thomas C. Ray
Defendant:
State of Oregon, State of Oregon, State of Oregon Department of Corrections 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.
