Cases 1 - 9 of 9
Douglas G. Peterson, Investments, Inc. et al v. United States of America
as 3:2023cv01464
Plaintiff:
Douglas G. Peterson, Investments, Inc. an Oregon Corporation doing business as Petersons Fourth Avenue and Douglas Gale Peterson
Defendant:
United States of America
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question
Carney v. Michael Terrace Apartments, LLC et al
as 3:2019cv01782
Plaintiff:
Staci Lyn Carney
Defendant:
Mark Passanante, Michael Terrace Apartments, LLC, Mark A. Peterson and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Crowe et al v. Oregon State Bar et al
as 3:2018cv02139
Defendant:
Oregon State Bar Board of Governors, Oregon State Bar, Christine Constantino and others
Plaintiff:
Oregon Civil Liberties Attorneys, Daniel Z Crowe, Lawrence K Peterson and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2018cv01876
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 47 U.S.C. § 227
Sixel, LLC v. Penning, III et al
as 6:2017cv01846
Defendant:
Airport Strategy and Marketing, Limited, Ilona Cambron, Theresa (Terri) A. Campbell and others
Plaintiff:
Sixel, LLC
Cause Of Action: 18 U.S.C. § 1836 (b) Civil Action to Protect Trade Secrets
Peterson Machinery Co. v. Cantrell
as 1:2012cv00689
Defendant:
Gary Lee Cantrell
Plaintiff:
Peterson Machinery Co.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question: Breach of Contract
Peterson v. Islamic Republic of Iran
as 3:2008mc09256
Plaintiff:
Deborah D. Peterson
Defendant:
Islamic Republic of Iran
Beaver Creek Cooperative Telephone Company v. Clackamas County et al
as 3:2007cv00645
Plaintiff:
Beaver Creek Cooperative Telephone Company, Beaver Creek Cooperative Telephone Company and Beaver Creek Cooperative Telephone Company
Defendant:
Clackamas County, Martha Schrader, Bill Kennemer and others
Cause Of Action: 47 U.S.C. § 0553 Cable Communications Policy Act of 1984
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.
