Legal Opinion

McClintock v. Schiedler

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Decided September 22, 1993No. 92C-11119; CA A76814PublishedCited by 18 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtDurham, J.

Plaintiff appeals from a judgment granting defendant’s motion to dismiss her writ of habeas corpus. ORS 34.680(1). We affirm.

Plaintiff filed a sworn petition for a writ of habeas corpus alleging that defendant failed to provide her with adequate medical and dental care in violation of the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution and Article I, sections 13 and 16, of the Oregon Constitution. The court issued a writ, defendant filed a return, and plaintiff filed a replication that stated her allegations in detail. Defendant moved to dismiss the writ pursuant to ORS…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Penrod v. CuppOregon Supreme Court · 1978
  2. Bedell v. SchiedlerOregon Supreme Court · 1989
  3. Smallman v. GladdenOregon Supreme Court · 1955

3Cited by18 opinions

  1. Frady v. MorrowCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2000
  2. Christenson v. ThompsonCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2001
  3. Fort v. PALMATTERCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2000
  4. Roy v. PalmateerCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2004
  5. Shelton v. ArmenakisCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1997

13 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