Cases 1 - 10 of 15
Sosa v. Mass. DOC, et al
as 24-1433
Plaintiff:
CHE BLAKE SOSA
Defendant:
DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTION, JAMES J. SABA, former Superintendent, MCI Cedar Junction, in his official and individual capacities, LUIS S. SPENCER, former Commissioner of the Department of Correction, in his official and individual capacities and others
Gladu v. Maine Department of Corrections, et al
as 23-1006
Plaintiff / Appellant:
NICHOLAS A. GLADU
Plaintiff:
ZACHARY SWAIN, ROBERT J. CARROLL, RYAN LANE and others
Defendant / Appellee:
MAINE DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, RANDALL LIBERTY, in his official capacity as Commissioner of Maine Department of Corrections, MATTHEW MAGNUSSON, individually and in his official capacity as Warden of Maine State Prison and others
Defendant:
RYAN THORNELL, individually and in his official capacity as Deputy Commissioner of Maine Department of Corrections, DANIEL RITTER, individually and in his official capacity as Health Services Administrator for Wellpath LLC and JOHN NEWBY, individually and in his official capacity as Regional Vice President for Wellpath LLC
Gladu v. Maine Department of Corrections, et al
as 22-1645
Plaintiff / Appellant:
NICHOLAS A. GLADU
Plaintiff:
ZACHARY SWAIN, ROBERT J. CARROLL, RYAN LANE and others
Defendant / Appellee:
MAINE DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, RANDALL LIBERTY, in his official capacity as Commissioner of Maine Department of Corrections, MATTHEW MAGNUSSON, individually and in his official capacity as Warden of Maine State Prison and others
Defendant:
RYAN THORNELL, individually and in his official capacity as Deputy Commissioner of Maine Department of Corrections, DANIEL RITTER, individually and in his official capacity as Health Services Administrator for Wellpath LLC and JOHN NEWBY, individually and in his official capacity as Regional Vice President for Wellpath LLC
JAMES v. MAINE DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS et al
as 2:2022cv00144
Plaintiff:
MICHEAL JOHN JAMES
Defendant:
MAINE DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, WELLPATH RECOVERY SOLUTIONS, ANTHONEY CANTILLO and others
Not Classified By Court:
MAINE ATTORNEY GENERAL - PRISONER CASES
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Lopes v. Riendeau, et al
as 17-1413
Plaintiff - Appellant:
DANA E. LOPES
Defendant - Appellee:
GERALDINE RIENDEAU, RN, BARBARA BERG, LPN, DYANA NICKL, Senior Director of Program UMass Correctional Health and others
Widi v. Federal Bureau of Prisons, et al
as 17-1292
Plaintiff - Appellant:
DAVID J. WIDI, JR.
Defendant:
MICHELLE GONYEA, Case Management Coordinator, FCI Ray Brook, f/k/a FNU Gaunyea, FNU KUZNECOW, (first name unknown) Correctional Officer, FCI Berlin, K. LEWIS, Physician's Assistant, FCI Berlin and others
Defendant - Appellee:
E. L. TATUM, Warden, FCI Berlin, a/k/a Esker Lee Tatum, DAN SULLIVAN, Case Management Coordinator, FCI Berlin, WANDA MULLINS, Unit Manager, FCI Berlin and others
Interested Party:
BRIAN PATTERSON
AL-HAJ v. FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS et al
as 1:2015cv12805
Plaintiff:
AHMED MOHAMMED AL-HAJ
Defendant:
Federal Bureau of Prisons, Jeff Grondolsky, CLINICAL DIRECTOR and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Larkin v. Forensic Health Services, Inc, et al
as 15-1643
Plaintiff - Appellant:
MICHAEL L. LARKIN
Defendant - Appellee:
FORENSIC HEALTH, a subsidiary of Mental Health Management Services, KIM LYMAN, MS LMHC, Clinical Director, LISA TROIANO, MA, Treatment Unit Coordinator and others
Lopes v. Riendeau, et al
as 15-1435
Plaintiff - Appellant:
DANA E. LOPES
Defendant - Appellee:
GERALDINE RIENDEAU, RN, BARBARA BERG, LPN, DYANA NICKL, Senior Director of Program UMass Correctional Health and others
Defendant:
UMASS CORRECTIONAL HEALTH SERVICES, Program Services
Larkin v. Forensic Health Services, Inc, et al
as 13-2187
Plaintiff - Appellant:
MICHAEL L. LARKIN
Defendant - Appellee:
FORENSIC HEALTH SERVICES, INC., A subsidiary of Mental Health Management Services, KIM LYMAN, MS LMHC, Clinical Director and others
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.
