Lovelace v. BOARD OF PAROLE AND POSTPRISON SUPERVISION
This text of 51 P.3d 1274 (Lovelace v. BOARD OF PAROLE AND POSTPRISON SUPERVISION) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Oregon primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
Scott A. LOVELACE, Petitioner,
v.
BOARD OF PAROLE AND POSTPRISON SUPERVISION, Respondent.
Court of Appeals of Oregon.
Hardy Myers, Attorney General, Michael D. Reynolds, Solicitor General, and Judy C. Lucas, Assistant Attorney General, for the motion.
Scott A. Lovelace, pro se, contra.
Before BREWER, Presiding Judge, and WOLLHEIM and KISTLER, Judges.
On Respondent's Motion to Dismiss August 17, 2001.
Petitioner's Answer and Opposition to Respondent's Motion to Dismiss September 20, 2001.
Respondent's Amended Motion to Dismiss December 19, 2001.
Petitioner's Answer and Opposition to Respondent's Amended Motion to Dismiss January 17, 2002.
*1275 PER CURIAM.
Motion to dismiss denied. Lovelace v. Board of Parole and Post-Prison Supervision, 183 Or.App. 283, 51 P.3d 1269 (2002).
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
51 P.3d 1274, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/lovelace-v-board-of-parole-and-postprison-supervision-orctapp-2002.