Cases 41 - 50 of 122
Komatsu v. The City of New York
as 21-119
Defendant / Appellee:
NYPD Detective Raymond Gerola, Shield No. 6577, NYPD Inspector Howard Redmond, Detective Andrew Berkowitz, Shield No. 7141 and others
Defendant:
Officer Jane Doe 1, Rachel Atcheson, Joe Baccellieri, in his official capacity as Chief of the New York State Unified Court System's Court Officers Academy and others
Plaintiff / Appellant:
Towaki Komatsu
Komatsu v. The City of New York
as 21-121
Defendant / Appellee:
NYPD Detective Raymond Gerola, Shield No. 6577, NYPD Inspector Howard Redmond, Detective Andrew Berkowitz, Shield No. 7141 and others
Defendant:
Officer Jane Doe 1, Rachel Atcheson, Joe Baccellieri, in his official capacity as Chief of the New York State Unified Court System's Court Officers Academy and others
Plaintiff / Appellant:
Towaki Komatsu
Komatsu v. City of New York
as 21-75
Defendant / Appellee:
NYPD Detective Raymond Gerola, Shield No. 6577, NYPD Inspector Howard Redmond, Detective Andrew Berkowitz, Shield No. 7141 and others
Defendant:
Officer Jane Doe 1, Rachel Atcheson, Joe Baccellieri, in his official capacity as Chief of the New York State Unified Court System's Court Officers Academy and others
Plaintiff / Appellant:
Towaki Komatsu
Komatsu v. The City of New York
as 21-73
Defendant / Appellee:
Christopher Fowler, NYPD Officer (badge #: 3185), sued in individual and official capacities, Keith Dietrich, NYPD Officer (shield #5779), John Doe, NYPD Officer and others
Plaintiff / Appellant:
Towaki Komatsu
Defendant:
John Doe, 1,
Braga v. NYC Police Department
as 20-4061
Defendant:
Officer John Doe, Police Officer Joe John, Joe Jane, Police Officer and others
Defendant / Appellee:
New York City Police Department, officially and individually in their capacity
Plaintiff / Appellant:
Ronaldo Lee Braga
Komatsu v. The City of New York
as 20-4103
Defendant / Appellee:
Christopher Fowler, NYPD Officer (badge #: 3185), sued in individual and official capacities, Keith Dietrich, NYPD Officer (shield #5779), John Doe, NYPD Officer and others
Plaintiff / Appellant:
Towaki Komatsu
Defendant:
John Doe, 1,
Fredericks v. Doe
as 20-3918
Defendant / Appellee:
Captain John Smith, #1651, individually and in their official capacities, Deputy Officer John Doe, individually and in their official capacities, Captain Officer John Doe, individually and in their official capacities and others
Plaintiff / Appellant:
Nigel Fredericks
Donmez v. NYC Department of Consumer Aff
as 20-3830
Defendant / Appellee:
Officer Henderson, NYC Parks Department, Officer Ocelin, NYC Parks Department and Officer John Doe, NYC Parks Department
Defendant:
NYC Judge Charlotte Davidson, New York City Office of Administrative Trials and Hearings, The City of New York and others
Plaintiff / Appellant:
Ibrahim Donmez
Raydo v. City of New York
as 20-3685
Plaintiff / Appellant:
Melanie Raydo and Daniel Lang
Defendant:
New York City Police Officer John Doe #1, individually, the names "John Doe" being fictitious as their complete names and/or current identities are presently unknown and New York City Police Officers John and Jane Does #2-#10, individually, the names John Doe" and "Jane Doe" being fictitious as their complete names and/or current identities are presently unknown
Defendant / Appellee:
New York City Police Officer Eric Rodriguez, individually and City of New York
Vasquez v. The County of Rockland
as 20-3684
Defendant / Appellee:
Correction Officer John Kezek, in his individual and official capacity as a Correction Officer employed by the County of Rockland, Correction Officer Paul Orbacz, in his individual and official capacity as a Correction Officer employed by the County of Rockland, Sergeant Karl Mueller, in his individual and official capacity as a Correction Officer employed by the County of Rockland and others
Defendant:
Correction Officers John Does, 1-3, in their individual and official capacities as Correction Officers
Plaintiff / Appellant:
Kim Vasquez
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.
