Cases 1 - 10 of 31
Teral Sherman v. James S. Hill et al
as 5:2022cv01211
Plaintiff:
Teral Sherman
Defendant:
James S. Hill, M. Torres, D. Mortimer and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Teral Sherman v. James S. Hill et al
as 2:2022cv04676
Plaintiff:
Teral Sherman
Defendant:
James S. Hill, M. Torres, D. Mortimer and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Kruppenbacher et al v. Annucci et al
as 1:2020cv00110
Defendant:
Laura A. Stanaway, Wilfredo Lamboy, Thomas R. Griffin and others
Plaintiff:
Joseph Kruppenbacher
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Lamboy v. Department of Urology
as 2:2018cv01984
Plaintiff:
Inez Gary L Lamboy
Defendant:
Department of Urology
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Justin Tafua v. Juan Rodriguez et al
as 2:2015cv08802
Defendant:
Bandeljo Colon, Bandeljo Colon, Lisa Connor and others
Plaintiff:
Justin Tafua
Michael Todd Thacker v. Tim Perez et al
as 5:2015cv00280
Defendant:
S Aref, S Aref, Sandro Colon and others
Plaintiff:
Michael Todd Thacker
IN RE: BAYSIDE LITIGATION (NAJEE BLACKMAN)
as 1:2011cv04032
Pecial_master:
JOHN W. BISSELL
Defendant:
BAYSIDE STATE PRISON , ROBERT ROES 1 TO 50 , JOHN SMITHS 1 TO 15 and others
Plaintiff:
NAJEE BLACKMAN
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
IN RE: BAYSIDE LITIGATION
as 1:1997av09999
Pecial_master:
JOHN W. BISSELL
Defendant:
BAYSIDE STATE PRISON , ROBERT ROES 1 TO 50 , JOHN SMITHS 1 TO 15 and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
IN RE: BAYSIDE LITIGATION (HAMPTON JENKS)
as 1:2011cv04034
Pecial_master:
JOHN W. BISSELL
Defendant:
BAYSIDE STATE PRISON , ROBERT ROES 1 TO 50 , JOHN SMITHS 1 TO 15 and others
Plaintiff:
HAMPTON JENKS
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
IN RE: BAYSIDE LITIGATION (CHARLES WRENN)
as 1:2011cv04036
Pecial_master:
JOHN W. BISSELL
Defendant:
BAYSIDE STATE PRISON , ROBERT ROES 1 TO 50 , JOHN SMITHS 1 TO 15 and others
Plaintiff:
CHARLES WRENN
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.
