Cases 1 - 10 of 399
Petteway v. Parsons et al
as 3:2024cv00763
Plaintiff:
Christopher Q. Petteway
Defendant:
Parsons, Yasdel Moya, Landolina and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Croney v. Doe et al
as 9:2024cv00483
Plaintiff:
Norman Croney
Defendant:
John/Jane Doe, Michael Deamoru, Dannielle Medburry and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Goode v. United States of America et al
as 1:2024cv02054
Plaintiff:
LASEAN GOODE
Other:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS, MDC BROOKLYN and others
Defendant:
MDC Brooklyn Warden, FCI Danbury Warden and John & Jane Does #1-10
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 bv Fed. Question: Bivens-Prisoner
Romulus v. County of Suffolk et al
as 2:2024cv00895
Plaintiff:
Tracy A. Romulus
Defendant:
County of Suffolk, Suffolk County Police Department, Suffolk County Police Officer Erik Doughty and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441 Notice of Removal
Noble v. Warden John/Jane Doe
as 1:2024cv00633
Petitioner:
Jerome Noble
Respondent:
Warden John/Jane Doe
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Hayes v. John/Jane Doe
as 1:2024cv00560
Plaintiff:
Hafiz Hayes
Defendant:
John/Jane Doe
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
In re: Jesus Torres
as 1:2024cv00411
Plaintiff:
Jesus Torres
Defendant:
John/Jane Doe
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Allen v. John/Jane Doe
as 1:2023cv11328
Plaintiff:
Marcus Allen
Defendant:
John/Jane Doe
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Jeanty v. The City of New York et al
as 1:2023cv09472
Plaintiff:
Vladimir Jeanty
Defendant:
The City of New York, Camba, Lt. Carlos Serrano and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Noble v. Warden John/Jane Doe
as 1:2023cv11062
Petitioner:
Jerome Noble
Respondent:
Warden John/Jane Doe
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
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.
