New York Prisoner Petitions Cases
Cases 21 - 30 of 50,278
Rodriguez v. Ashong et al
as 1:2024cv05349
Defendant:
Mary Ashong, Dr. Carol Moores and Hla-Pe Win
Plaintiff:
Angel Rodriguez
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2024cv04940
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1651 Petition for Writ of Mandamus
Austin v. McGuiness
as 6:2024cv06443
Respondent:
T. McGuiness
Petitioner:
Sean Austin
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Phelps v. Superintendent et al
as 6:2024cv06445
Respondent:
Governor, C.F., Superintendent and others
Petitioner:
Darryl Phelps
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Ahmed v. Kinney et al
as 9:2024cv00875
Plaintiff:
Ali Hassan Ahmed, III
Defendant:
Jason Kinney and Brent Fane
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
DuBose v. Bureau of Prisons et al
as 9:2024cv00877
Defendant:
F.C.I. Ray Brook and Bureau of Prisons
Plaintiff:
Zumar DuBose
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question
Fredricks v. May et al
as 6:2024cv06436
Defendant:
C. May and John Doe Correction Officer
Plaintiff:
Nigel Fredricks and Nigel Fredericks
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Latimore v. Lakeview Shock Correctional Facility et al
as 6:2024cv06435
Plaintiff:
Theodore T. Latimore
Defendant:
Lakeview Shock Correctional Facility, O. Salgado and D. Furguson
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Adams v. Berkman et al
as 9:2024cv00873
Defendant:
John Doe #2, C.O. M. Berkman, John Doe #1 and others
Plaintiff:
James A. Adams
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Muhammad v. Onondaga County Sheriff's Office Justice Center et al
as 9:2024cv00872
Defendant:
Jane Doe 1-4, Tobias Shelley, Maureen Murphy and others
Plaintiff:
Ali Muhammad
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
