1. Home
  2. Browse Decisions
  3. F.3d
  4. 114 F.3d
  5. 114 F.3d 17 (1997)
 

NICHOLAS v. TUCKER

Nos. 1448, 1693, Dockets 96-2470, 96-2528.

114 F.3d 17 (1997)

Jason B. NICHOLAS, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Edward TUCKER, Deputy Superintendent for Programs, Woodbourne Correctional Facility; Clayton Cook, Corrections Officer, Woodbourne Correctional Facility; Tammi Malone, Keyboard Specialist, Woodbourne Correctional Facility; New York State Department Of Correctional Services; Beatty, Lieutenant, Woodbourne Correctional Facility; Julkerski, Sergeant, Woodbourne Correctional Facility; Donald Selsky, Director, Special Housing Unit/Inmate Disciplinary Program, New York State Department of Correctional Facility, Defendants-Appellees. Jason B. NICHOLAS, on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. T.J. MILLER, Acting Superintendent/Deputy Superintendent for Programs, Woodbourne Correctional Facility; Robert Hanslmaier, Superintendent, Woodbourne Correctional Facility, New York State Department of Correctional Services, Defendants-Appellees.

United States Court of Appeals, Second Circuit.

Decided May 27, 1997.

Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Gordon Schnell, New York City (Douglas F. Broder, Coudert Brothers, New York City, of counsel), for Plaintiff-Appellant.

Martin A. Hotvet, Assistant Attorney General, Albany, New York (Dennis C. Vacco, Attorney General of the State of New York, Peter G. Crary, Assistant Attorney General, Albany, New York, of counsel), for Defendants-Appellees.

Steven M. Haber, Assistant U.S. Attorney, New York City (Mary Jo White, U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York, Marla Alhadeff, Assistant U.S. Attorney, New York City, of counsel), for Intervenor United States of America.

Before: VAN GRAAFEILAND, WALKER and LEVAL, Circuit Judges.

VAN GRAAFEILAND, Circuit Judge:

Jason B. Nicholas, an indigent prisoner currently serving a New York State court sentence of 6 1/3 to 19 years' imprisonment, petitions this Court for relief by way of mandamus, injunction or declaratory judgment invalidating the filing fee provisions of the Prison Litigation Reform Act. 28 U.S.C. § 1915. Because appeals in the two above-entitled actions presently are pending, we have jurisdiction to consider the petition. We thus...

Let's get started

Leagle.com

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.

  • Updated daily.
  • Uncompromising quality.
  • Complete, Accurate, Current.

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases