Cases 31 - 40 of 581
Easom v. Mello et al
as 1:2023cv01489
Plaintiff:
Warren Edwin Easom
Defendant:
Maia Mello, Clayton Joseph Lance and Curry County Sheriff's Department
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Easom v. Lance et al
as 6:2023cv01409
Plaintiff:
Warren Edwin Easom
Defendant:
Clayton J. Lance, Maia Mello, Curry County, OR, Sheriff's Department and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Barrett v. Harrold
as 6:2023cv01398
Petitioner:
Spencer Joseph Barrett
Respondent:
Sheriff Clifton Harrold
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Fly v. Multnomah County Sheriff's Office
as 3:2023cv01359
Plaintiff:
John Fly
Defendant:
Multnomah County Sheriff's Office
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question
Shabazz v. Lowe et al
as 3:2023cv01312
Plaintiff:
Sheikh Shabazz
Defendant:
Jason Lowe, Fred Bull and Multnomah County Sheriff's Office
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Gilliland v. Duncan et al
as 6:2023cv01247
Plaintiff:
Robin R. Gilliland
Defendant:
Sheriff Michelle Duncan, Jail Commander Ted Langley, Jane Does and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Harris et al v. Pfizer et al
as 3:2023cv01216
Plaintiff:
Jonathan A. Harris and Ezekiel S. Dolcide
Defendant:
Pfizer, Moderna, Johnson & Johnson and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Branderhorst v. Newton et al
as 3:2023cv01198
Plaintiff:
Joshua Casey Branderhorst
Defendant:
Casey Newton and Clackamas County Sheriff
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Dewhurst v. Garrett
as 3:2023cv01187
Plaintiff:
James A. Dewhurst
Defendant:
Sheriff Pat Garrett
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2023cv01127
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
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.
