Cases 11 - 20 of 58
McPherson et al v. Lamont et al
as 3:2020cv00534
Defendant:
Rollin Cook and Ned Lamont
Plaintiff:
Tre McPherson, John Doe, John Roe and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2020cv03067
Petitioner:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Respondent:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Warwick v. Doe et al
as 3:2020cv00227
Defendant:
Debbie Wilson, Joseph Breton, Stephanie McClain and others
Plaintiff:
Christopher Warwick
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Miller v. Annucci et al
as 9:2019cv01225
Defendant:
Denise Sauther, John Doe 1-3, FNU Kelly and others
Plaintiff:
Mary Miller and Daniel Miller
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Hoey v. County of New York et al
as 1:2019cv04470
Defendant:
Lawrence Hale Newman, Audrey S. Moore, Esq., Cyrus R. Vance, Jr. and others
Plaintiff:
Thomas Hoey, Jr
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Hindu-Robles v. MDC Brooklyn et al
as 1:2017cv05487
Defendant:
Brooklyn Hospital, Jane Roe(s), John Doe(s) and others
Plaintiff:
Juan Nicholas Hindu-Robles
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Shabazz v. Howard
as 17-2310
Plaintiff - Appellant:
Michael Aziz Zarif Shabazz, AKA Michael A. Hurley
Defendant - Appellee:
T. Howard, Sergeant; Upstate Correctional Facility, R. Rhondo, Upstate Correctional Facility, B. Burdett, Upstate Correctional Facility and others
Defendant:
Dabiew, Velie, D. Dumas, prison guard and others
Banks et al v. Song et al
as 1:2017cv04418
NEOCC:
Frederick Banks
Defendant:
Robert Cessar, Federal Bureau of Investigation, Mark R. Hornak, J. and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Banks v. Song et al
as 3:2017cv01189
Plaintiff:
Frederick Banks
Defendant:
Soo Song, Robert Cessar, Mark R. Hornak and others
Cause Of Action: No cause code entered
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2017cv01182
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
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.
