Cases 1 - 10 of 18
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2022cv01811
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question: Employment Discrimination
Bralich v. Gayner, et al
as 21-1416
Plaintiff / Appellant:
PHILIP A. BRALICH
Defendant / Appellee:
MICHAEL GAYNER, SHAMBHALA MOUNTAIN CENTER, MEMBERS OF THE SHAMBHALA BOARD and others
Bralich v. Gayner et al
as 1:2020cv03800
Defendant:
Dan Peterson, Executive Director San Francisco Shambhala Center, Betsy Railla and others
Plaintiff:
Philip A. Bralich
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Peterson v. Superintendent
as 3:2015cv00202
Petitioner:
Dan Peterson
Respondent:
Superintendent
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Peterson v. Superintendent
as 3:2015cv00199
Petitioner:
Dan Peterson
Respondent:
Superintendent
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
PETERSON v. SMITH
as 1:2015cv00632
Petitioner:
DAN PETERSON
Respondent:
BRIAN SMITH
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Dutton, et al v. City of Midwest City, et al
as 15-6048
Plaintiff - Appellant:
RODNEY DUTTON and SHIRLEY DUTTON
Defendant - Appellee:
THE CITY OF MIDWEST CITY, DAN PETERSON, Police Officer Badge #88, OKLAHOMA COUNTY DETENTION CENTER and others
Smith v. United States of America
as 14-168
Plaintiff - Appellant:
Benjamin Smith
Defendant - Appellee:
United States of America, D. Kirkby, Factory Foreman, Federal Correctional Institution Ray Brook, Lucas, Case Manager, Federal Correctional Institution Ray Brook and others
Dutton et al v. Midwest City City of et al
as 5:2013cv01239
Plaintiff:
Rodney Dutton and Shirley Dutton
Defendant:
Midwest City City of, Dan Peterson, Oklahoma County Detention Center and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Dutton et al v. Midwest City City of et al
as 5:2013cv00912
Plaintiff:
Rodney Dutton and Shirley Dutton
Defendant:
Midwest City City of, John Doe, Dan Peterson and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
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.
