Barreto v. County of Suffolk

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that a complaint against John Doe defendants satisfied Rule 8(a), as liberally applied to pro se complaints, where the plaintiff “identified the specific [jobs] that the John Doe defendants were assigned to, as well as their presence (or lack thereof
• “[A]rguably, the presence of dangerous mold and mildew in his cell might meet the first prong.”
• “[A]rguably, the presence of dangerous mold and mildew in his cell might meet the first prong.”
• description sufficient when plaintiff alleged “the specific posts that the John Doe defendants were assigned to,” “their presence (or lack thereof) at a specified time and place,” and “the grounds for liability with regards to each of the Defendants”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).