Cases 11 - 20 of 20
A Lot In Delmar, Inc. et al v. The State of New York et al
as 1:2014cv00292
Plaintiff:
A Lot In Delmar, Inc. and The Estate of Elizabeth Z. Smith
Defendant:
The State of New York and The New York State Department of Environmental Conservation
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 9601
TNHYIF, INC. v. Vineyard Commons Holding, LLC et al
as 1:2012cv01692
Plaintiff:
TNHYIF, INC.
Defendant:
Vineyard Commons Holding, LLC, Workers Compensation Board of The State of New York, New York State Department of Labor and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441 Notice of Removal
ULLOA v. MID HUDSON VALLEY FEDERAL CREDIT UNION et al
as 1:2010cv00356
Plaintiff:
Richard Enrique Ulloa
Defendant:
Mid Hudson Valley Federal Credit Union, SUPREME COURT FOR THE STATE OF NEW YORK and Does 1-10
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question: Tort Action
ULLOA v. WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A. et al
as 1:2010cv00345
Plaintiff:
Richard Enrique Ulloa
Defendant:
Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., SUPREME COURT FOR THE STATE OF NEW YORK and Does 1-10
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question: Tort Action
State of New York et al vs. Kempthorne, et al
as 6:2008cv00644
Plaintiff:
State of New York, State of New York, State of New York and others
Defendant:
Dirk Kempthorne, James E. Cason, P. Lynn Scarlett and others
Cause Of Action: U.S. Government Defendant
RBS Citizens, National Association v. Guilderland Realty Holdings, Corp. et al
as 1:2007cv01210
Plaintiff:
RBS Citizens, National Association
Defendant:
Guilderland Realty Holdings, Corp., Guilderland Center Group, LLC, Guilderland LTC Management, LLC and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Contract Default
Stockbridge-Munsee v. State of New York, et al
as 3:1986cv01140
Plaintiff:
Stockbridge-Munsee Community
Defendant:
State of New York , Mario Cuomo , New York State Department of Transportation and others
Counter_claimant:
Madison County , Oneida County, New York , Town of Augusta, New York and others
Counter_defendant:
Stockbridge-Munsee Community
Movant:
Oneida Indian Nation of New York
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1443
Canadian St. Regis, et al v. State of New York, et al
as 5:1982cv00783
Plaintiff:
Canadian St. Regis Band of Mohawk Indians
Defendant:
State of New York , Mario Cuomo , County of St. Lawrence, NY and others
Consol_plaintiff:
St. Regis Mohawk Tribe and People of the Longhouse at Akwesasne
Consol_defendant:
Power Authority of the State of New York , Key Bank of North New York, N.A. , William J. Brockway and others
Intervenor_plaintiff:
United States of America
Intervenor_defendant:
Canadian National Railways , Walsh Realty Corp. , Marine Midland Properties Corp. and others
Counter_claimant:
State of New York , Canadian National Railways , Niagara Mohawk Power Corporation and others
Counter_defendant:
United States of America, People of the Longhouse at Akwesasne , St. Regis Mohawk Tribe and others
Movant:
Mowhawk Council of Kahnawa';ke
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1362
Cayuga Indian Nation, et al v. New York State, et al
as 5:1980cv00930
Defendant:
New York State Department of Corrections , New York State Dept. of Environmental Conservation , New York State Department of Health and others
Intervenor_plaintiff:
Seneca-Cayuga Tribe of Oklahoma and United States
Plaintiff:
Cayuga Indian Nation of New York
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1362
Oneida Ind. NY, et al v. County of Oneida, NY, et al
as 5:1974cv00187
Plaintiff:
Oneida Indian Nation of New York State , Oneida Indian Nation of Wisconsin and Thames Band of Canada (Oneida)
Intervenor_plaintiff:
United States and New York Brothertown Indian Nation
Movant:
Bond, Schoeneck & King
Defendant:
State of New York and Madison County, New York and Oneida County, New York
Counter_claimant:
State of New York
Counter_defendant:
Oneida Indian Nation of New York State , Oneida Indian Nation of Wisconsin , Thames Band of Canada (Oneida) and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1362
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.
