Cases 1 - 10 of 17
James Murphy v. Hannah Dockery-Mosebach, et al
as 22-35392
Plaintiff / Appellant:
JAMES MICHAEL MURPHY, MD
Defendant / Appellee:
HANNAH DOCKERY-MOSEBACH and UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Murphy v. Dockery-Mosebach
as 3:2021cv01045
Plaintiff:
MD James Michael Murphy
Defendant:
Hannah Dockery-Mosebach
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1442
James Murphy v. Thomas Welhelm, et al
as 21-35367
Defendant / Appellee:
THOMAS J. WELHELM, M.D. and HOOD RIVER COUNTY DISTRICT ATTORNEY'S OFFICE
Defendant:
CITY OF HOOD RIVER POLICE DEPARTMENT
Plaintiff / Appellant:
JAMES MICHAEL MURPHY, MD
Murphy v. United States of America
as 2:2021cv00576
Defendant:
United States of America
Plaintiff:
James Michael Murphy
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2671
Murphy, MD v. Wilhelm
as 3:2021cv00349
Defendant:
M.D. Thomas J Wilhelm
Plaintiff:
James Michael Murphy, MD
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441
James Murphy v. USAF, et al
as 20-35067
Defendant / Appellee:
DONALD J. TRUMP, JEFFERY SILVER, Brig. General Ref., MICHAEL STENCEL, Major General and others
Plaintiff / Appellant:
JAMES MICHAEL MURPHY, MD
Murphy v. Welhelm et al
as 3:2019cv01733
Defendant:
Hood River City Police Department, Thomas J Welhelm and Hood River County District Attorney Office
Plaintiff:
James Michael Murphy
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Murphy v. USA DO NOT DOCKET IN THIS CASE . ALL PLEADINGS SHOULD BE FILED DOCKET No: 1:91-cr-10039-DPW-5
as 1:2019cv12126
Respondent:
USA
Petitioner:
James Michael Murphy, Jr.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255
Murphy v. City of Hood River
as 3:2018cv01844
Defendant:
City of Hood River, Pulido, Martin and others
Plaintiff:
James Michael Murphy
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Murphy v. United States Air Force et al
as 3:2018cv01506
Defendant:
Katherine Brown, Major General Michael Stencel, Col. Heidi Kjos and others
Plaintiff:
James Michael Murphy
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.
