Knight v. New York State Department of C
| Wayne Stewart, on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated |
| New York State Department of Corrections, a public entity, Carl Koenigsmann, MD, Susan Mueller, MD, David S. Dinello, MD, Paula Bozer, MD, John Hammer, MD, John Does, MD #1-#54, New York State Department of Corrections and Community Supervision, a public entity, John and Jane Does, #1-#15 Regional Health Services Administrators, John and Jane Does, MD #1-#54, John Morley, MD, John and Jane Doe, Mid-Level Clinicians #1-#50 and John and Jane Doe, Regional Health Services Administrators #1-#15 |
| Hugh Knight, on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated and Shannon Dickinson, on behalf of themselves and all otehrs similarly situated |
| Chung Lee, MD and Albert Acrish, NP |
| 22-964 |
| April 29, 2022 |
| U.S. Court of Appeals, Second Circuit |
| PRISONER PET-Civil Rights |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on May 18, 2022. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 22 SO-ORDERED SCHEDULING NOTIFICATION, setting Appellant Albert Acrish and Chung Lee Brief due date as 08/12/2022. Joint Appendix due date as 08/12/2022, FILED.[3317201] [22-964] [Entered: 05/18/2022 10:24 AM] |
| Filing 19 LR 31.2 SCHEDULING NOTIFICATION, on behalf of Appellant Albert Acrish and Chung Lee, informing Court of proposed due date 08/12/2022, RECEIVED. Service date 05/18/2022 by CM/ECF.[3317130] [22-964] [Entered: 05/18/2022 09:56 AM] |
| Filing 18 NEW CASE MANAGER, Jessica Mckenzie, ASSIGNED.[3316367] [22-964] [Entered: 05/17/2022 11:34 AM] |
| Filing 13 PAYMENT OF DOCKETING FEE, on behalf of Appellant Albert Acrish and Chung Lee, district court receipt # ANYSDC-26151985, FILED.[3315942] [22-964] [Entered: 05/16/2022 04:57 PM] |
Filing 12
ORDER, dated 05/16/2022, dismissing appeal by 05/31/2022, unless Appellant Albert Acrish and Chung Lee submits fee or moves for in forma pauperis, FILED.[3315300] [22-964] [Entered: 05/16/2022 09:27 AM]
|
| Filing 11 FORM D, on behalf of Appellant Albert Acrish and Chung Lee, FILED. Service date 05/13/2022 by CM/ECF.[3314657] [22-964] [Entered: 05/13/2022 12:06 PM] |
| Filing 10 FORM C, on behalf of Appellant Albert Acrish and Chung Lee, FILED. Service date 05/13/2022 by CM/ECF.[3314649] [22-964] [Entered: 05/13/2022 12:03 PM] |
| Filing 9 ACKNOWLEDGMENT AND NOTICE OF APPEARANCE, on behalf of Appellant Albert Acrish and Chung Lee, FILED. Service date 05/13/2022 by CM/ECF.[3314646] [22-964] [Entered: 05/13/2022 11:59 AM] |
| Filing 8 ACKNOWLEDGMENT AND NOTICE OF APPEARANCE, on behalf of Appellee Shannon Dickinson and Hugh Knight, FILED. Service date 05/11/2022 by CM/ECF.[3312655] [22-964] [Entered: 05/11/2022 07:14 AM] |
| Filing 7 CAPTION, Changing designation of Wayne Stewart to Plaintiff, AMENDED.[3311989] [22-964] [Entered: 05/10/2022 10:33 AM] |
| Filing 5 ATTORNEY, Cleland B. Welton, [ # 4 ], in place of attorney Barbara D. Underwood, SUBSTITUTED.[3311982] [22-964] [Entered: 05/10/2022 10:28 AM] |
| Filing 4 NOTICE OF APPEARANCE AS SUBSTITUTE COUNSEL, on behalf of Appellant Albert Acrish and Chung Lee, FILED. Service date 05/10/2022 by CM/ECF. [3311937] [22-964] [Entered: 05/10/2022 10:03 AM] |
| Filing 3 ELECTRONIC INDEX, in lieu of record, FILED.[3307212] [22-964] [Entered: 05/02/2022 02:08 PM] |
| Filing 2 DISTRICT COURT OPINION AND ORDER, dated 03/30/2022, RECEIVED.[3307209] [22-964] [Entered: 05/02/2022 02:07 PM] |
| Filing 1 NOTICE OF PRISONER APPEAL, with district court docket, on behalf of Appellant Albert Acrish and Chung Lee, FILED. [3307196] [22-964] [Entered: 05/02/2022 02:00 PM] |
Access additional case information on PACER
Access the Case Summary and Docket Report to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
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.
