Cases 1 - 10 of 17
Bradshaw v. Annucci
as 24-819
Defendant:
GRAVELL, Mental Health Therapist, Upstate Correctional Facility, UHLER, Superintendent, Upstate Correctional Facility, R. CANTWELL, Commissioner Hearing Officer, Upstate Correctional Facility and others
Plaintiff:
JAY BRADSHAW
Bradshaw v. Annucci
as 24-416
Defendant:
GRAVELL, Mental Health Therapist, Upstate Correctional Facility, R. BARBOSA, CHO, Mid-State Correctional Facility, R. CANTWELL, Commissioner Hearing Officer, Upstate Correctional Facility and others
Plaintiff:
JAY BRADSHAW
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 22-1619
Plaintiff / Appellant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant / Appellee:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Bradshaw v. Annucci et al
as 6:2021cv06604
Plaintiff:
Jay Bradshaw
Defendant:
Piccolo, Hill, S White and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Bradshaw v. Annucci et al
as 9:2021cv00901
Plaintiff:
Jay Bradshaw
Defendant:
Anthony Annucci, A. Rodriguez, Uhler and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Doe v. Cornell University
as 20-1971
Defendant:
College of Engineering, Wendy Gilmore-Fitzgerald, David Forbes Delchamps, Associate Professor and others
Plaintiff / Appellant:
John Doe
Defendant / Appellee:
Luke Zachary Fenchel
Iqbal v. Waters et al
as 6:2020cv06223
Defendant:
Keller, Superintendent Rich, Sgt. Waters and others
Plaintiff:
Raja Iqbal
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Collins-New v. Commissioner of Social Security
as 1:2020cv00019
Defendant:
Commissioner of Social Security
Plaintiff:
Juanice R. Collins-New
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 405
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2019cv01189
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000 Job Discrimination (Race)
Collins-New v. Colvin
as 1:2016cv01030
Plaintiff:
Juanice R. Collins-New
Defendant:
Carolyn W. Colvin
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 405
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.
