Cases
Cases 1 - 10 of 12
Tracy Gillis v. Chandra Chapman, et al
as 22-35840
Plaintiff / Appellant: TRACY GILLIS
Defendant / Appellee: CHANDRA E. CHAPMAN, in her individual capacity and as an official of the State of Oregon, JORDAN MEYER, in his individual capacity and as an official of the State of Oregon, DIANE BEECHINOR, in her individual capacity and as an official of the State of Oregon and others
Defendant: KELLY HICKMAN, CLYDE SAIKI and OREGON DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES
Shayla Duke, et al v. Clyde Saiki, et al We have downloadable decisions or orders for this case
as 20-35155
Defendant: REGINALD C. RICHARDSON, Dr., GLORIA TAYLOR OLIVARES, BRIAN KIMBELL and others
Plaintiff / Appellant: DAVID DUKE and SHAYLA DUKE
Defendant / Appellee: ASHLEY CARSON COTTINGHAM, in her official capacity as the Director of Aging and People with Disabilities, Oregon Department of Human Services, CLYDE SAIKI, in his personal and official capacity as former Director of Department of Human Services, State of Oregon and FARIBORZ PAKSERESHT, in his personal and official capacity as Director of Department of Human Services, State of Oregon
Shayla Duke, et al v. Clyde Saiki, et al
as 19-35804
Defendant / Appellee: CLYDE SAIKI, in his personal and official capacity as former Director of Department of Human Services, State of Oregon, FARIBORZ PAKSERESHT, in his personal and official capacity as Director of Department of Human Services, State of Oregon and ASHLEY CARSON COTTINGHAM, in her official capacity as the Director of Aging and People with Disabilities, Oregon Department of Human Services
Plaintiff / Appellant: DAVID DUKE and SHAYLA DUKE
Shayla Duke, et al v. Clyde Saiki, et al
as 19-35716
Defendant: REGINALD C. RICHARDSON, Dr.; in his official capacity as the Deputy Director for the Oregon Department of Human Services, HEATHER BELL, in her official capacity as an Hearings Representative for Aging and People with Disabilities, Oregon Department of Human Services, DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES and others
Plaintiff / Appellant: DAVID DUKE and SHAYLA DUKE
Defendant / Appellee: ASHLEY CARSON COTTINGHAM, in her official capacity as the Director of Aging and People with Disabilities, Oregon Department of Human Services, CLYDE SAIKI, in his personal and official capacity as former Director of Department of Human Services, State of Oregon and FARIBORZ PAKSERESHT, in his personal and official capacity as Director of Department of Human Services, State of Oregon
Plaintiff v. Defendant We have downloadable decisions or orders for this case
as 3:2018cv00300
Defendant: Plaintiff v. Defendant
Plaintiff: Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights (Employment Discrimination)
Gleason et al v. Bundage et al
as 6:2017cv01415
Defendant: Amanda Bundage, Jane Doe 1 and Clyde Saiki
Plaintiff: Christina Susan Gleason and S.F.
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Gillis v. Chapman et al We have downloadable decisions or orders for this case
as 6:2017cv00705
Defendant: Diane Beechinor, Linda Canizales, Chandra E Chapman and others
Plaintiff: Tracy Gillis
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
C.S. et al v. Saiki et al We have downloadable decisions or orders for this case
as 6:2017cv00564
Plaintiff: B. B., T. B., K. C. and others
Defendant: Clyde Saiki and Lilia Teninty
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Federal Question: Other Civil Rights
Rapley et al v. Oregon Department of Human Services, Stabilization and Crisis Unit et al We have downloadable decisions or orders for this case
as 3:2017cv00294
Defendant: Tessa Baston, Bradley Heath, Jana McLellan and others
Plaintiff: Britny De Leon, Angela Fenn, Annamaria Magliulo and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Berman et al v. Brown et al
as 6:2016cv02108
Plaintiff: Diana Berman, Penney Mullinax and Beverly Ulven
Defendant: Kate Brown, Katy Coba, Cheryl Miller and others
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.


Why Is My Information Online?