Cases 1 - 10 of 48
Profit v. Rasmussen et al
as 2:2024cv10654
Plaintiff:
Samuel Bernard Profit
Defendant:
Rasmussen, Johnson, Burgess and others
Nealy #209732 v. Thornell et al
as 2:2024cv00449
Plaintiff:
Charles E Nealy, Jr.
Defendant:
Ryan Thornell, Julie Bowers, J Barreras and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2023cv01380
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1651 Petition for Writ of Mandamus
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2023cv03215
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1651 Petition for Writ of Mandamus
McShane v. State of Oregon et al
as 2:2023cv01184
Plaintiff:
Mark James McShane
Defendant:
State of Oregon, Multnomah County District Attorney and Portland Police
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
McShane v. State of Oregon et al
as 3:2023cv01184
Plaintiff:
Mark James McShane
Defendant:
State of Oregon, Multnomah County District Attorney and Portland Police
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2023cv02990
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1361 Petition for Writ of Mandamus
MILHOUSE v. UNITED STATES et al
as 2:2023cv02297
Plaintiff:
KAREEM MILHOUSE
Defendant:
UNITED STATES, FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATIONS, THOMAS PERZICHILLI and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Moore v. Parsons et al
as 3:2022cv01360
Plaintiff:
Samuel Moore
Defendant:
Ryan Parsons, Peter Pietraroia, Steven Penn and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Nance #168108 v. Shinn et al
as 2:2022cv01302
Plaintiff:
Keith Preston Nance
Defendant:
David Shinn, Kenneth Herman, Allen Miser 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.
