Last Updated: 7.9.26
Public access to official court filings and related documents: federal lawsuit filed by Commissioner Casey Miller – United States District Court – District of Oregon. These materials are shared to help the public better understand the legal and governance issues raised in the case. VIDEO – watch the 9.18.24 meeting.
Why This Matters to Lincoln County Residents
This is not a personal dispute — it is a dispute about the functioning of representative government. When an elected official’s ability to participate in governance is restricted, the public loses representation too.
After publicly raising concerns regarding government process and transparency (9.18.24), actions were taken that, according to the lawsuit, restricted Miller’s ability to fully carry out the duties of an elected commissioner. This lawsuit asks whether those restrictions violated constitutional and whistleblower protections and interfered with the public’s right to representation. This lawsuit was filed after repeated efforts to resolve governance and access concerns internally were unsuccessful.
Document List (Chronological Order)
The allegations contained in the pleadings remain subject to judicial review, and the defendants dispute many of the claims asserted in the lawsuit.
1. 3.13.26: Complaint – The initial filing that outlines the legal claims, including alleged civil rights violations under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and whistleblower protection violations under ORS 659A.199 and ORS 659A.203. Superseded by the First Amended Complaint listed below. (ECF 01).
2. 3.31.26: Plaintiff’s Motion for a Preliminary Injunction – A request for the court to take immediate action to restore Commissioner Miller’s access to county facilities, his ability to meet with department heads, and his ability to place items on the Board of Commissioners’ agenda. (ECF 11).
3. 4.14.26: Defendants’ Response to Motion for Preliminary Injunction – The formal legal response from Lincoln County and the named defendants opposing the requested injunction. (ECF 12).
a. Declaration of Kristin Yuille – A supporting statement by County Counsel Kristin Yuille.
b. Declaration of David Collier – A supporting statement and exhibit by HR Director David Collier.
4. 4.28.26: Plaintiff’s Reply re: Motion for Preliminary Injunction – The plaintiff’s legal response to the arguments raised by the defendants in their opposition filing. (ECF 15).
a. Declaration of Casey Miller – A formal statement by Commissioner Miller filed in support of the reply, detailing his perspective on the ongoing dispute and efforts toward resolution.
b. Exhibit 1: Commissioner Miller’s Report (9.18.24) – Documentation of a report submitted to the Board on 9.18.24 regarding systemic management, public records, and meeting laws.
c. Exhibit 2: Summary Document – 2024-2026 (2.9.26) – Commissioner Miller’s comprehensive log and summary of agenda and meeting requests facilitated or not facilitated by the county during this period.
5. 5.22.26: Defendants’ Special Motion to Strike and Motion to Dismiss – The defendants move to strike and dismiss Commissioner Miller’s whistleblower retaliation claim, arguing that the claim is barred by Oregon’s anti-SLAPP statute and the applicable statute of limitations. (ECF 21).
a. Declaration of David Collier – A supporting statement by HR Director David Collier.
b. Declaration of Kristin Yuille – A supporting statement by County Counsel Kristin Yuille.
6. 5.26.26: First Amended Complaint: The first amendment to the initial filing that outlines the legal claims, including alleged civil rights violations under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and whistleblower protection violations under ORS 659A.199, ORS 659A.203, and ORS 659A.030(1)(h). (ECF 24).
7. 6.4.26: Defendants’ Sur Reply re: Plaintiff’s Motion for Preliminary Injunction: The defendants’ legal response to the arguments raised in Plaintiff’s Reply re: Motion for Preliminary Injunction. (ECF 25).
a. Declaration of David Collier – A supporting statement by HR Director David Collier.
b. Declaration of Kristin Yuille – A supporting statement by County Counsel Kristin Yuille.
8. 6.9.26: Defendants’ Special Motion to Strike and Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff’s First Amended Complaint – The defendants move to strike and dismiss Commissioner Miller’s First Amended Complaint alleging whistleblower retaliation, arguing that the claim is barred by Oregon’s anti-SLAPP statute and the applicable statute of limitations. (ECF 28).
9. 6.18.26: Opinion and Order re: Plaintiff’s Motion for Preliminary Injunction – The Court granted Commissioner Miller’s Motion for Preliminary Injunction, finding he is likely to succeed on his First Amendment retaliation claim and ordering the County to immediately restore him to the regular rights and prerogatives of his elected office, including access to his office, county facilities, and meetings or communications customarily available to Lincoln County Commissioners. (ECF 31).
10. 6.22.26: Plaintiff’s Response to Defendants’ Special Motion to Strike and Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff’s First Amended Complaint – The plaintiff’s legal response opposing the defendants’ effort to strike and dismiss the First Amended Complaint, arguing that the anti-SLAPP motion does not apply, that the retaliation claims are based on adverse actions rather than protected speech, and that the whistleblower retaliation claim should proceed. (ECF 32).
11. 7.6.26: Defendants’ Reply in Support of Special Motion to Strike and Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff’s First Amended Complaint – The defendants argue that Commissioner Miller’s whistleblower retaliation claim should be stricken or dismissed because it is based on protected activity, is time-barred, and does not apply to him as an elected official. (ECF 34).
Deadlines
Related News Coverage
Public reporting related to the legal filings and issues discussed in the case.
- Miller Response Disputes County Motions in Federal Lawsuit – Lincoln County News Source – 6.25.26
- Judge orders Lincoln County to let Miller back into courthouse offices – Lincoln Chronicle – 6.18.26
- Federal Judge Orders Lincoln County to Restore Miller’s Regular Commissioner Rights – Lincoln County News Source – 6.17.26
- Lincoln County Faces Scrutiny Over Outside Investigations and Workplace Climate – Lincoln County News Source – 5.12.26
- Vote to End Closed-Door Government in Lincoln County – Lincoln Leader – 4.29.26
- Commissioner Casey Miller Seeks Court Order Restoring Office Access, Agenda Rights – Oregon Coast Breaking News – 4.2.26
- Commissioner Casey Miller Files Federal Retaliation Lawsuit – Oregon Coast Breaking News – 3.17.26
- After Four-Month Probe, Investigators Say Lincoln County Commissioner Miller Did Not Harass Staff – Lincoln Chronicle – 1.20.25
- County Commission Candidate Criticizes Miller Investigation Process – Lincoln Chronicle – 1.21.25
Legal Counsel Contact
Questions regarding the legal filings or court proceedings may be directed to counsel for Plaintiff:
Beth Creighton
Creighton & Rose, PC
735 SW First Avenue, Suite 300
Portland, Oregon 97204
(503) 221-1792
beth@civilrightspdx.com