Cases 1 - 5 of 5
Allen v. New York State Department of Corrections and Community Supervision
as 24-785
Plaintiff:
PETER ALLEN, on behalf of themselves and others similarly situated, BRIAN BERNARD, on behalf of themselves and others similarly situated, MARK DANIELS, on behalf of themselves and others similarly situated and others
Defendant:
Dr. CAROL MOORES, NEW YORK STATE DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS AND COMMUNITY SUPERVISION, CHUN LEE, MD and others
Allen v. New York State Department of Corrections and Community Supervision
as 24-30
Plaintiff / Appellee:
PETER ALLEN, on behalf of themselves and others similarly situated, BRIAN BERNARD, on behalf of themselves and others similarly situated, MARK DANIELS, on behalf of themselves and others similarly situated and others
Plaintiff:
SPENCER JACKSON, on behalf of themselves and others similarly situated, MICHAEL VATTIATO, on behalf of themselves and others similarly situated and EDDIE FIELDS, on behalf of themselves and others similarly situated
Defendant:
NEW YORK STATE DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS AND COMMUNITY SUPERVISION, CARL KOENIGSMANN, MD, JOHN MORLEY, MD and others
Defendant / Appellant:
CAROL MOORES, DR.
Crichlow v. Dinello et al
as 1:2023cv03386
Plaintiff:
Kevin Crichlow
Defendant:
David Dinello, Kristin Salotti, NP, David Rosner and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Perez v. Dinello et al
as 1:2023cv03300
Plaintiff:
Joseph Perez
Defendant:
David Dinello, Paula Bozer, Dr. Susan Mueller and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Allen et al v. New York State Department of Corrections and Community Supervision et al
as 1:2019cv08173
Plaintiff:
Spencer Jackson, Wayne Stewart, Peter Allen and others
Defendant:
Kathleen Mantaro, MD, John Doe #2, MD, Jon Miller, MD and others
Interested Party:
New York State Office of the Attorney General
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
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.
