Cases 21 - 30 of 93
Brooks v. Hogan
as 21-1785
Plaintiff / Appellant:
Charles Brooks
Defendant / Appellee:
Michael Hogan, Former OMH Commissioner, Richard P. Miraglia, Former Associate Commissioner, OMH, Maureen Bosco, Executive Director, CNYPC and others
Defendant:
Emmet Creahan, Director of Mental Hygiene Legal Service, Fourth Department, Michael J. Hungerford, Deputy Chief Attorney, Mental Hygiene Legal Services, Fourth Department, Janine E. Rella, Principal Attorney, Mental Hygiene Legal Services, Fourth Department and others
Brooks v. Hogan
as 21-1571
Defendant / Appellee:
Richard P. Miraglia, Former Associate Commissioner, OMH, Anthony Gonzalez, Director of Risk Management, Central New York Psychiatric Center, Michael Larkin, SCTA-2; Office of Mental Health and others
Plaintiff / Appellant:
Charles Brooks
Defendant:
Janine E. Rella, Principal Attorney, Mental Hygiene Legal Services, Fourth Department, Dr. Kumar Bahl, Psychiatrist, Central New York Psychiatric Center, Craig P. Schlanger, Senior Attorney, Mental Hygiene Legal Services, Fourth Department and others
Atkinson v. In the matter of the State of
as 21-1244
Defendant:
M.H.L. Act 10 and In the matter of the State of New York
Defendant / Appellee:
Anthony J. Annucci, Anne Marie McGrath, C.O LaRock, Draft Officer and others
Plaintiff / Appellant:
Anthony Atkinson
Palmer v. Amazon.com, Inc.
as 20-3989
Plaintiff / Appellant:
Luis Pellot-Chandler, Deasahni Bernard, Derrick Palmer and others
Defendant / Appellee:
Amazon.com Services, LLC and Amazon.com, Inc.
Amicus Curiae:
Catherine Troisi, Alex Reinert, Alan Morrison and others
Roy Day v. General Motors, LLC, et al
as 21-10300
Plaintiff / Appellant:
ROY A. DAY
Defendant / Appellee:
MARY T. BARRA and GENERAL MOTORS, LLC
Roy Day v. General Motors, LLC, et al
as 21-10263
Plaintiff / Appellant:
ROY A. DAY
Defendant / Appellee:
MARY T. BARRA and GENERAL MOTORS, LLC
Phillips v. Delaney
as 20-3734
Defendant / Appellee:
City of White Plains, New York, Kerry A. Delaney, individually and as Acting Commission of the Office of Persons with Developmental Disabilities, Stanley Silverstein, individually and as Director of Institutes of Applied Human Dynamics and others
Plaintiff / Appellant:
Alfred J. Vent, h individually as residents and as Area Representative in Prospect Park and Charles Phillips, each individually as residents and as Area Representative of Prospect Park
Plaintiff:
Jay Weinberger, as resident of Prospect Park
Phillips v. Delaney
as 20-3905
Defendant / Appellant:
Institutes of Applied Human Dynamics, Inc., Mary T. St. Marks, individually, Office of Persons with Developmental Disabilities and others
Plaintiff / Appellee:
Charles Phillips, each individually as residents and as Area Representative of Prospect Park, Alfred J. Vent, h individually as residents and as Area Representative in Prospect Park and Alfred J. Vent, each individually as residents and as Area Representative in Prospect Park
Defendant:
Thomas Roach, individually and as Mayor of the City of (White Plains) New York and City of White Plains, New York
Plaintiff:
Jay Weinberger, as resident of Prospect Park
Jones v. Cuomo
as 20-3496
Defendant:
McCormick, Fontino, Donna Hall, Associate Commissioner, OMH and others
Defendant / Appellee:
Deborah J. McCulloch, Executive Director; CNYPC, Jeff Nowicki, Chief Mental Health Treatment Service, CNYPC, Alyssa Moskal and others
Plaintiff / Appellant:
Daniel Jones
Brooks v. Hogan
as 20-1779
Defendant / Appellee:
Richard P. Miraglia, Former Associate Commissioner, OMH, Anthony Gonzalez, Director of Risk Management, Central New York Psychiatric Center, Michael Larkin, SCTA-2; Office of Mental Health and others
Plaintiff / Appellant:
Charles Brooks
Defendant:
Janine E. Rella, Principal Attorney, Mental Hygiene Legal Services, Fourth Department, Dr. Kumar Bahl, Psychiatrist, Central New York Psychiatric Center, Craig P. Schlanger, Senior Attorney, Mental Hygiene Legal Services, Fourth Department 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.
