Legal Opinion

Jane Doe 130 v. Archdiocese of Portland in Oregon

District Court, D. Oregon

Decided May 4, 2010No. CV 08-193-PKPublishedCited by 9 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION & ORDER

MOSMAN, District Judge.

On April 8, 2010, Magistrate Judge Papak issued Findings and Recommendation (“F & R”) (# 82) in the above-captioned case recommending that I DENY plaintiffs Motion to Compel (#44), DISMISS plaintiffs claim of misrepresentation, DENY AS MOOT defendants’ Motion to Dismiss (# 52) as to Jane’s misrepresentation claim, DENY the remainder of the Motion to Dismiss (# 52), and GRANT IN PART AND DENY IN PART defendants’ Motion for Judicial Notice (# 54). No objections were filed.

DISCUSSION

The magistrate judge makes only recommendations to the court, to which any…

2Cases cited32 opinions

  1. Ashcroft v. IqbalSupreme Court of the United States · 2009
  2. Bell Atlantic Corp. v. TwomblySupreme Court of the United States · 2007
  3. Thomas v. ArnSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
  4. Lujan v. Defenders of WildlifeSupreme Court of the United States · 1992
  5. United States v. Jose Francisco Reyna-Tapia, AKA Jose ReynaCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2003

27 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. WM.. v. Am. Airlines, Inc.District Court, D. Oregon · 2018
  2. Butters v. The Travelers Home and Marine Insurance CompanyDistrict Court, D. Oregon · 2023
  3. Granas v. Union Pacific Railroad CompanyDistrict Court, D. Oregon · 2025
  4. Mark Granas v. Union Pacific Railroad CompanyDistrict Court, D. Oregon · 2025
  5. McMillin v. Walmart Inc.District Court, D. Oregon · 2024

4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API