Makinson (Steven P.), Tipton (Daniel R.) v. City of Eugene, Oregon, City of Springfield, Oregon, Nauta (Gary), Siel (Rick B.), McCarthy (Timothy), Olson (Robert), Egeter (Steve), Antoine (Robert)

Ninth Circuit

Makinson (Steven P.), Tipton (Daniel R.) v. City of Eugene, Oregon, City of Springfield, Oregon, Nauta (Gary), Siel (Rick B.), McCarthy (Timothy), Olson (Robert), Egeter (Steve), Antoine (Robert)

828 F.2d 23

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit·Decided September 3, 1987·No. 86-3803·Published·Cited by 4 cases

Opinion

828 F.2d 23

Makinson (Steven P.), Tipton (Daniel R.)
v.
City of Eugene, Oregon, City of Springfield, Oregon,
Nauta (Gary), Siel (Rick B.), McCarthy
(Timothy), Olson (Robert), Egeter
(Steve), Antoine (Robert)

NO. 86-3803

United States Court of Appeals,
Ninth Circuit.

SEP 03, 1987

Appeal From: D.Or.

AFFIRMED.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Makinson (Steven P.), Tipton (Daniel R.) v. City of Eugene, Oregon, City of Springfield, Oregon, Nauta (Gary), Siel (Rick B.), McCarthy (Timothy), Olson (Robert), Egeter (Steve), Antoine (Robert), 828 F.2d 23 (9th Cir. 1987).

Pincite

828 F.2d 23 (Makinson (Steven P.), Tipton (Daniel R.) v. City of Eugene, Oregon, City of Springfield, Oregon, Nauta (Gary), Siel (Rick B.), McCarthy (Timothy), Olson (Robert), Egeter (Steve), Antoine (Robert)) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related