Cases 1 - 10 of 10
Greater Chautauqua Federal Credit Union v. Quattrone
as 23-733
Plaintiff / Appellee:
Greater Chautauqua Federal Credit Union, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Boulevard Federal Credit Union, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated and Greater Niagara Federal Credit Union, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated
Appellant:
Western New York Law Center and Bartel Miller
Defendant:
Hon. Lawrence K. Marks, in his official capacity as Chief Administrative Judge of the Courts and Letitia James, in her official capacity as Attorney General of the State of New York
Defendant / Appellee:
Sheriff James B. Quattrone, Sheriff John Garcia, in his official capacity as Sheriff of Erie County, New York and Sheriff Michael J. Filicetti, in his official capacity as Sheriff of Niagara County, New York
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
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
Gottlieb v. Ned
as 22-449
Plaintiff / Appellant:
Andy Gottlieb, on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated, Lorna Chand, on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated, Richard Lacourciere and others
Defendant / Appellee:
Ned Lamont, Governor of the State of Connecticut, Denise Merrill, Secretary of the State of Connecticut and Democratic State Central Committee
Homestead Repair & Renovation, Inc. v. City of Buffalo et al
as 1:2021cv00388
Plaintiff:
Homestead Repair & Renovation, Inc., Individually and On Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated and Homestead Repair & Renovation, Inc.
Defendant:
Byron W. Brown, City of Buffalo and Kevin Helfer
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. ยง 2201
Cruz v. Zucker
as 16-4311
Plaintiff:
I.H., on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated, N.V., Legal Guardian of S.V., a minor, Individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated and S.V., a minor child by N.V., Legal Guardian, Individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated
Plaintiff - Appellant:
Angie Cruz, on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated, Ares Kpaka, Riya Christie and others
Defendant - Appellee:
Howard Zucker, as Commissioner of the Department of Health
Cruz v. Zucker
as 16-4173
Plaintiff:
I.H., on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated, N.V., Legal Guardian of S.V., a minor, Individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated and S.V., a minor child by N.V., Legal Guardian, Individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated
Plaintiff - Appellee-Cross-Appellant:
Angie Cruz, on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated, Ares Kpaka, Riya Christie and others
Defendant - Appellant-Cross-Appellee:
Howard Zucker, as Commissioner of the Department of Health
Jacoby & Meyers, LLP et al v. The Presiding Justiceas of the
as 15-2608
Plaintiff:
Jacoby & Meyers USA, LLC, on behalf of themselves and all other similarly situated entities authorized to practice law in the State of New York
Plaintiff - Appellant:
Jacoby & Meyers USA II, PLLC and Jacoby & Meyers Law Offices, LLP, on behalf of itself and all other similarly situated entities authorized to practice Law in the State of New York
Defendant - Appellee:
The Presiding Justices of The First, Second, Third and Fourth Departments, Appellate Division Of The Supreme Court Of The State Of New York, Eric T. Schneiderman, Diane Maxwell Kearse, in her official capacity as Chief Counsel for the Grievance Committee for the Second, Eleventh and Thirteenth Judicial Districts and others
Defendant:
Peter Tom, Angela Mazzarelli, Richard T. Andrias and others
Jacoby & Myers Law Offices, LL v. The Presiding Justices of The
as 12-1377
Plaintiff - Appellant:
Jacoby & Myers Law Offices, LLP, on behalf of itself and all other similarly situated entities authorized to practice Law in the State of New York and Jacoby & Meyers USA, LLC
Defendant - Appellee:
The Presiding Justices of The First, Second, Third and Fourth Departments and Appellate Division Of The Supreme Court Of The State Of New York
Joseph v. Hyman
as 10-3943
Plaintiff - Appellant:
Charles Joseph, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Jeffrey Unger, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Stefan Wolkenfeld, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated and others
Defendant - Appellee:
Michael Hyman, individually and in his official capacity as Commissioner of the Department of Finance of the City of New York, Martha E. Stark, Jaime Woodward, individually and in her official capacity as Commissioner of the Department of Taxation and Finance of the State of New York 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.
