Cases 11 - 20 of 28
Thousand v. Corrigan
as 17-3522
Plaintiff - Appellant:
Robert Thousand
Defendant - Appellee:
Sean Corrigan, Correctional Officer; Great Meadow Correctional Facility, Douglas Jones, Correctional Officer; Great Meadow Correctional Facility, Roswell Segovis, Correctional Officer; Great Meadow Correctional Facility and others
Defendant:
John Doe # 1, Correctional Officer; Great Meadow Correctional Facility and John Doe # 2, Correctional Officer; Great Meadow Correctional Facility
Canty v. Prack
as 17-3364
Plaintiff - Appellant:
Moshe Cinque Canty
Defendant - Appellee:
T. Tamer, Correctional Sergeant, Sweeney, Correctional Sergeant, D. Venne, Correctional Officer and others
Defendant:
Albert Prack, Director of Special Housing and Inmate Disciplinary Programs, Thomas LaValley, Superintendent, Clinton Correctional Facility, D. Lucia, Correctional Captain/Hearing Officer and others
Abreu v. Lira
as 17-2448
Plaintiff - Appellant:
Carlos Abreu
Defendant - Appellee:
Michael J. Lira, Deputy Commissioner for Programs at Upstate Correctional Facility; sued in individual and official capacities, Gerald J. Otis, Deputy Commissioner for Administrative; Upstate Correctional Facility; sued in both individual and official capacities, David A. Rock, Superintendent of Upstate Correctional Facility; sued in both individual and official capacities and others
Defendant:
Cromp, Correctional Officer; Upstate Correctional Facility; sued in individual capacity, Constantino, Correctional Captain; Wende Correctional Facility; sued in individual and official capacities, S. Danforth, Facility Steward; Upstate Correctional Facility; sued in both individual and official capacities and others
Elder v. McCarthy
as 17-2420
Plaintiff - Appellant:
Jarvis Elder
Defendant - Appellee:
J. McCarthy, Sergeant, T. MacIntyre, Correction Officer, Ken Kling, Hearing Officer/Voc. Supr and others
Elder v. McCarthy
as 17-2230
Plaintiff - Appellant:
Jarvis Elder
Defendant - Appellee:
J. McCarthy, Sergeant, T. MacIntyre, Correction Officer, Ken Kling, Hearing Officer/Voc. Supr and others
Abreu v. Lira
as 17-1848
Plaintiff - Appellant:
Carlos Abreu
Defendant - Appellee:
Michael J. Lira, Deputy Commissioner for Programs at Upstate Correctional Facility; sued in individual and official capacities, Gerald J. Otis, Deputy Commissioner for Administrative; Upstate Correctional Facility; sued in both individual and official capacities, David A. Rock, Superintendent of Upstate Correctional Facility; sued in both individual and official capacities and others
Defendant:
Cromp, Correctional Officer; Upstate Correctional Facility; sued in individual capacity, Constantino, Correctional Captain; Wende Correctional Facility; sued in individual and official capacities, S. Danforth, Facility Steward; Upstate Correctional Facility; sued in both individual and official capacities and others
Isasi v. Fischer
as 17-1780
Petitioner:
Richard Isasi
Respondent:
Brian Fischer, Ex-Commissioner of The New York State Department of Correction and Service, Albert Prack, Director of Special Housing and Inmate Discipline, Norman Bezio, Former Director of Special Housing and Inmate Discipline and others
Ortiz v. Prack
as 17-1226
Plaintiff - Appellant:
Enrique Ortiz, AKA Enrequie Ortiz
Defendant - Appellee:
Albert Prack, Director of Special Housing/Inmate Discipline
Isasi v. Fischer
as 17-1172
Petitioner:
Richard Isasi
Respondent:
Brian Fischer, Ex-Commissioner of The New York State Department of Correction and Service, Albert Prack, Director of Special Housing and Inmate Discipline, Norman Bezio, Former Director of Special Housing and Inmate Discipline and others
Isasi v. Fischer
as 16-4242
Petitioner - Appellant:
Richard Isasi
Defendant - Appellee:
Brian Fischer, Ex-Commissioner of The New York State Department of Correction and Service, Albert Prack, Director of Special Housing and Inmate Discipline, Norman Bezio, Former Director of Special Housing and Inmate Discipline 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.
