Legal Opinion

Doe v. Marsh

District Court, N.D. New York

Decided March 19, 1996No. 93-CV-0676PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

MEMORANDUM-DECISION & ORDER

McAVOY, Chief Judge.

I. BACKGROUND

The defendants, NAOMI MARSH, JOAN L. MILOWE, ARLENE SHEFFIELD, REBECCA GARDNER, and THOMAS SO-BOL, have moved for summary judgment. The plaintiffs, JOHN DOE and JANE ROE, two HIV 1 positive individuals, oppose the defendants’ summary judgment motion and have cross-moved for summary judgment in their favor.

In brief, the plaintiffs allege that the defendants, either directly or by failing to prop erly supervise, violated their constitutionally-protected right to privacy, and thus 42 U.S.C. § 1983, and committed a breach of…

2Cases cited33 opinions

  1. Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, Administratrix of the Estate of CatrettSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
  2. Matsushita Electric Industrial Co., Ltd. v. Zenith Radio CorporationSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
  3. Harlow v. FitzgeraldSupreme Court of the United States · 1982
  4. West v. AtkinsSupreme Court of the United States · 1988
  5. Anderson v. CreightonSupreme Court of the United States · 1987

28 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Doe v. MarshCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1997
  2. Doe v. MarshCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1997
  3. Pisciotti v. County of WayneDistrict Court, W.D. New York · 1999
  4. (PC) Holmes v. BaughmanDistrict Court, E.D. California · 2022
  5. Santos v. County of HumboldtDistrict Court, N.D. California · 2023

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API