Source-linked public-record research into lawsuits, outcomes, related proceedings, court rulings, public statements and litigation chronology.
3:26-cv-02570 · U.S. District Court, Middle District of Pennsylvania
Evidentiary treatment: This summarizes the plaintiff's own allegations as stated in the complaint or docket record cited below. It reflects what was filed, not a court finding, and is not a determination that the allegations are true.
Plaintiff sued the City of Carbondale and Douglas Calzola. The docket records the nature of suit as civil rights and the cause of action as 42 U.S.C. § 1983, indicating a federal civil-rights claim against a municipality and an individual. The filing fee was paid, so the action is not on a screening track, and the four opening entries of Sept. 8, 2026 are the complaint with its civil cover sheet, a letter to a pro se litigant, the summons issued as to both defendants, and the fee receipt.
Sourcing limitation, as of Oct. 3, 2026: the complaint has not been read and could not be obtained on any free route. The free federal mirror holds a docket shell with no entries, no published opinion exists, and the Internet Archive mirror has no copy. Nothing is recorded here about what conduct is alleged, what the individual defendant is said to have done, or what relief is sought. The description above rests on the court’s own docket coding, not on the complaint.
This page separates court/ruling records, party filings, research classifications, secondary sources and public statements. Unknown or unresolved fields remain labelled as such.
Research status: Source-backed docket record (Justia, read 2026-09-15): caption, both parties, nature of suit, cause of action and all four opening docket entries. The complaint itself is not obtainable free and has not been read; CourtListener/RECAP holds no documents for this case Update 2026-10-11: the free federal mirror holds a docket shell with no entries for this case, which records that the docket has never been mirrored rather than that it is quiet.
Research notes: A civil-rights action under 28 U.S.C. 1983 naming two defendants, the City of Carbondale and Douglas Calzola, filed in September 2026. Found 2026-09-09 by a nationwide CourtListener party sweep. Assigned to Judge Phillip J. Caraballo. Update 2026-09-15: the record was wrong in three ways and is corrected here. The caption is “Tufano v. City of Carbondale et al”, not “Tufano v. City of Carbondale”; there is a second defendant, Douglas Calzola, who now appears on the docket’s summons entry alongside the city; and the action is a civil-rights suit, not another RICO one — nature of suit Civil Rights: Other, cause of action 28 U.S.C. 1983. The docket also shows the $405 fee paid under receipt number 333121431, so no 28 U.S.C. 1915(e)(2) screening track applies, and four entries all dated 2026-09-08: the complaint with civil cover sheet, a pro se letter, the summons issued as to both defendants, and the fee receipt. Nothing is docketed after the filing date. Read 2026-09-15 from the Justia docket record (https://dockets.justia.com/docket/pennsylvania/pamdce/3:2026cv02570/153821), whose snapshot is dated 2026-09-08. The earlier identification composite can now be retired. This record previously rested on five circumstantial signals because RECAP held only a docket shell with no party block, so the plaintiff’s identity was not confirmed from the federal record itself. The docket names Frank Tufano as plaintiff, which settles it directly. Nothing is recorded here about who Douglas Calzola is or what role the complaint alleges: the complaint is not obtainable free and has not been read. Update 2026-09-23: Docket metadata confirms the assigned judge as Magistrate Judge Phillip J. Caraballo. No other change; the docket is unmoved since the last pass.
Sequence does not by itself prove motive or causation.
Tufano filed C106, Tufano v. City of Carbondale et al, in the same district, six days after defence counsel appeared in C083 and 41 days after C083 was filed. It names the city itself and Douglas Calzola; C083 names the city’s police department. The fee was paid and summons issued as to both defendants.
Source — dockets.justia.com ↗Frank Tufano Litigation Research. "Tufano v. City of Carbondale et al (3:26-cv-02570)". Research last verified October 3, 2026. https://suedbyfranktufano.com/cases/3-26-cv-02570-tufano-v-city-of-carbondale-et-al/