Cases

DECISION AND ORDER DAVID N. HURD, District Judge. I. INTRODUCTION The Clerk has sent for review a civil rights complaint filed by pro se plaintiffs Edwin Banks, Mary Banks, Angel Dublin, and Tawanda Stark pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (“Section 1983”). Dkt. No. 1 (“Compl.”). None of the plaintiffs paid the filing fee required for this action. Plaintiff Edwin Banks, who is cur

Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 (transferred to this Court by order of the Supreme Court, entered in Albany County) to review a determination of respondent which found petitioner guilty of violating certain prison disciplinary rules. Petitioner was charged in a misbehavior report with assault, committing a sex offense, interfering with staff, being out of place, and leaving an assi

*1478 Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 (transferred to this Court by order of the Supreme Court, entered in Albany County) to review a determination of respondent which found petitioner guilty of violating a prison disciplinary rule. Following an investigation in which confidential information was received

Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 (transferred to this Court by order of the Supreme Court, entered in Albany County) to review a determination of the Commissioner of Corrections and Community Supervision finding petitioner guilty of violating certain prison disciplinary rules. During the course of an investigation, an investigator monitoring petitioner’s telephone calls became suspi

Rose, J. Appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court (O’Connor, J.), entered February 2, 2015 in Albany County, which dismissed petitioner’s application, in a combined proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 and action for declaratory judgment, to, among other things, review a determination of respondent denying petitioner’s request to rescind waste removal violation bills. On April 9, 2014, respondent’s Depa

Rose, J. Appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court (O’Connor, J.), entered February 2, 2015 in Albany County, which dismissed petitioner’s application, in a combined proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 and action for declaratory judgment, to, among other things, review a determination of respondent denying petitioner’s request to rescind waste removal violation bills. On April 9, 2014, respondent’s Depa

22-1801-cv(L) New Yorkers for Religious Liberty v. City of New York In the United States Court of Appeals For the Second Circuit August Term 2022 Argued: February 8, 2023 Decided: November 13, 2024 Amended: January 10, 2025 Nos. 22-1801,

22-1801-cv(L) New Yorkers for Religious Liberty v. City of New York In the United States Court of Appeals For the Second Circuit August Term 2022 Argued: February 8, 2023 Decided: November 13, 2024 Nos. 22-1801, 22-1876 NEW YORKERS FOR RELIGIOUS LIBERTY, INC., GENNAR

DECISION and ORDER GLENN T. SUDDABY, District Judge. Currently before the Court, in this civil rights action filed by Peddie Jenkins (“Plaintiff’) against five village entities and employees (“Village Defendants”), five city entities and employees (“City Defendants”), nine county entities and employees (“County Defendants”), and a state entity and two state employees (“State Defendants”), are f

DECISION AND ORDER H. KENNETH SCHROEDER, JR., United States Magistrate Judge Plaintiff, an inmate at Southport Correctional Facility, asserts that he was denied due process at two disciplinary hearings, retaliated against for successfully appealing his first disciplinary sanction, and subjected to cruel and inhumane conditions of confinement related to the use of mechanical restraints and exposure to unne

70 F.Supp.2d 1252 (1999) John D. MARRIE, et al., Plaintiffs, v. Marvin L. NICKELS, et al., Defendants. No. 97-3280-JTM. United States District Court, D. Kansas. September 30, 1999. Order Nunc Pro Tunc, October 18, 1999. *1253 *1254 *1255 Jo