Cases 1 - 8 of 8
Rice v. Resendes, et al
as 23-1433
Plaintiff:
BRIANNA J. ADAMS, BLENDA A. RICE and PATRICIA U. ADAMS
Plaintiff / Appellant:
JORDAN M. RICE
Defendant / Appellee:
RYAN W. RESENDES, CHRISTOPHER M. PACHECO and SAMUEL RAMUS
Defendant:
MICHAEL W. MORRISSEY, EDWARD J. DOHERTY, MICHAEL KASPRZAK and others
Adams et al v. Morrissey et al
as 1:2017cv11059
Plaintiff:
Brianna J. Adams, Patricia U. Adams, Blenda A. Rice and others
Defendant:
Michael W. Morrissey, Edward J Doherty, Michael Kasprzak and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Skandha v. MA Partnership for Correctiona, et al
as 15-2210
Plaintiff - Appellant:
BODHISATTVA SKANDHA
Defendant - Appellee:
MASSACHUSETTS PARTNERSHIP FOR CORRECTIONAL HEALTHCARE, THOMAS A. GROBLEWSKI, in his official and individual capacities, LINDA ALBOHN, in her official and individual capacities and others
Skandha v. Massachusetts Partnership for Correctional Health et al
as 1:2015cv12581
Plaintiff:
Bodhisattva Skandha
Defendant:
Massachusetts Partnership for Correctional Health, Thomas Groblewski, Linda Albohn and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Fuller v. O'BRIEN et al
as 1:2014cv14168
Plaintiff:
Charlene-Paige Fuller
Defendant:
CAROL HIGGINS O'BRIEN , Christine M. Verdini , Raymond W. Marchilli and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
LeBaron v. Massachusetts Partnership for Correctional Healthcare et al
as 1:2014cv14138
Plaintiff:
Nathan Marquis LeBaron
Defendant:
Massachusetts Partnership for Correctional Healthcare , Lynn Gillis , James Thompson and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441
Scott v. Diener et al
as 4:2014cv13159
Plaintiff:
Gary Scott
Defendant:
Robert B. Diener , Donald J. Hager , Linda Lee-Dynes and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Quiles v. Shoney et al
as 1:2014cv10324
Plaintiff:
Abimelec Quiles
Defendant:
Jeff Shoney, Becky Doe, Shawna Nasuti and others
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.
