Cases filed in the U.S. Court of Appeals, Second Circuit
Cases 31 - 40 of 512
Keitel v. D'Agostino, Sr.
as 23-933
Plaintiff: FJK Tee Jay Inc., a Florida Subchapter S Corporation, FJK Tee Jay, LTD, a Florida general partnership and Florida Capital Management LLC, a Florida Limited Liability Company
Plaintiff / Appellant: Frederick J. Keitel, III, individually, and as President of FJK IV PROPERTIES, INC., a Florida Corporation
Defendant / Appellee: Thomas B. D'Agostino, Sr., individually , and as Trustee(s) for the Thomas B. and Elizabieta D'Agostino 1997 CRT TRUST, a New York Charitable CRT Trust, Elzbieta D'Agostino, Schain Leifer Guralnick, a New York Certified Public Accounting firm and others
Freedom Mortgage Corporation v. King
as 23-911
Plaintiff / Appellant: Freedom Mortgage Corporation
Defendant / Appellee: Mechelle King, New York City Environmental Control Board, New York City Parking Violations Bureau and others
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 23-902
Plaintiff / Appellant: Plaintiff v. Defendant
Respondent: Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant / Appellee: Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant: Plaintiff v. Defendant
Dixon v. Adams
as 23-799
Plaintiff / Appellant: Shaw-Nae Dixon, Thomas Casatelli, Jeanette Rivera and others
Defendant / Appellee: Eric Adams and City of New York
Rahman v. United States Government
as 23-773
Plaintiff / Appellant: Shahidah Rahman
Defendant / Appellee: United States Government, MV Transportation, DMV Driver 981-740-482, Transcore Para Transit, Driver and others
Poplardo v. Adelberg
as 23-604
Plaintiff / Appellant: Michael R. Poplardo
Defendant / Appellee: Joel Adelberg, in his official capacity as Bedford Central School District Superintendent, Stacey Haynsworth, in her official capacity as BCSD Assistant Superintendent, Sara Richmond, Attorney and others
Defendant: Richard G. Kass and Daniel Snow
Lewis v. The Government of England and the United Kingdom
as 23-544
Plaintiff / Appellant: Marion T.D. Lewis, Individually and on Behalf of all others similarly situated
Defendant / Appellee: The Government of England and the United Kingdom, Attn: Rt Hon Victoria Prentis MP in her capacity as Attorney General for the United Kingdom and the Monarchy or Crown; and Michael Tomlinson in his capacity as Solicitor General of the United Kingdom and The Institution of the British Monarchy or The Crown, Attn: Rt Hon Victoria Prentis MP in her capacity as Attorney General for the United Kingdom and the Monarchy or Crown; and Michael Tomlinson in his capacity as Solicitor General of the United King
Sosa v. Sweet
as 23-536
Plaintiff / Appellant: Andres R. Sosa
Defendant / Appellee: Craig Burns, Psychiatric MD, PhD., Robert Berger, Psychiatric MD, PhD., Andrea C. Reischerl, PMHCNS-BC Pyschiatric APRN and others
Defendant: Correctional Officer Christopher Sweet, Correctional Officer David Evans, Correctional Officer L'T Brian Stadalnik and others
Lewis v. The Government of England and the United Kingdom
as 23-500
Plaintiff / Appellant: Marion T.D. Lewis, Individually and on Behalf of all others similarly situated
Defendant / Appellee: The Government of England and the United Kingdom, Attn: Rt Hon Victoria Prentis MP in her capacity as Attorney General for the United Kingdom and the Monarchy or Crown; and Michael Tomlinson in his capacity as Solicitor General of the United Kingdom and The Institution of the British Monarchy or The Crown, Attn: Rt Hon Victoria Prentis MP in her capacity as Attorney General for the United Kingdom and the Monarchy or Crown; and Michael Tomlinson in his capacity as Solicitor General of the United King
Johnson v. Rose M. Singer Center
as 23-119
Plaintiff / Appellant: Jinja Johnson, AKA Kyng Pariah and Jinja King Pariah, AKA Kyng Pariah
Defendant / Appellee: DA Adam Birhabam, Saranda Hadzaj, Lily C. Graham, P/O 13th and others
Defendant: Rose M. Singer Center, Mental Health/DOC, New York State, Victoria Nasarovia, Inmate and others

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?