Cases 1 - 10 of 61
Thomas Liddell v. New Jersey Department of Corre, et al
as 16-3571
Plaintiff - Appellant:
THOMAS LIDDELL
Defendant - Appellee:
NEW JERSEY DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, GEORGE HAYMAN, Commissioner, BERNARD GOODWIN, ADMINISTRATOR and others
BEST v. GOODWIN et al
as 3:2014cv00690
Plaintiff:
WILBERT BEST
Defendant:
BERNARD GOODWIN, GSYCF MEDICAL STAFF and NJ DOC
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Goodwin v. Neville
as 0:2013cv03468
Plaintiff:
Bernard Goodwin
Defendant:
Dr Neville
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Goodwin v. Esterline et al
as 0:2013cv03132
Plaintiff:
Bernard Goodwin
Defendant:
Travis Esterline and Corey Beckett
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Joseph Aruanno v. Bernard Goodwin, et al
as 13-3342
Plaintiff - Appellant:
JOSEPH ARUANNO
Defendant - Appellee:
BERNARD GOODWIN and ATTORNEY GENERAL NEW JERSEY
HOLLIDAY v. LANIGAN et al
as 3:2013cv01099
Plaintiff:
EMMANUEL HOLLIDAY
Defendant:
GARY M. LANIGAN, BERNARD GOODWIN, MICHELE RICCI and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
LIDDELL v. NEW JERSEY DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS et al
as 2:2012cv02669
Plaintiff:
THOMAS LIDDELL
Defendant:
NEW JERSEY DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, GEORGE HAYMAN, BERNARD GOODWIN and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Gilbert Greenfield, Jr. v. Jon Corzine, et al
as 12-2101
Plaintiff - Appellant:
GILBERT THOMAS GREENFIELD, JR., Others Similarly Situated
Defendant - Appellee:
GOV. JOHN CORZINE, GEORGE HAYMAN, GRACE ROGERS and others
Michael Hasher v. Bernard Goodwin, et al
as 11-1092
Plaintiff - Appellant:
MICHAEL HASHER
Defendant - Appellee:
BERNARD GOODWIN, Supr [DOC]. AT: STU and GREGG CONWAY, Admin. DOC
Joseph Aruanno v. Merrill Main, et al
as 10-3382
Plaintiff - Appellant:
JOSEPH ARUANNO
Defendant - Appellee:
MERRILL MAIN, Director of Psychology, CYNTHIA SWEENY, Administrator, GRACE ROGERS, Administrator 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.
