Cases 1 - 10 of 13
County of Rockland v. Metropolitan Transportation Authority
as 24-3325
Plaintiff:
EDWIN J. DAY, IN HIS OFFICIAL CAPACITY AS COUNTY EXECUTIVE, COUNTY OF ROCKLAND and LEGISLATURE OF THE COUNTY OF ROCKLAND
Defendant:
TRIBOROUGH BRIDGE AND TUNNEL AUTHORITY and METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY
Town of Hempstead et al v. Hochul et al
as 2:2024cv08121
Plaintiff:
Donald X. Clavin Jr., Ben Jackson, Ben's General Contracting Corp. and others
Defendant:
Metropolitan Transportation Authority, Kathy Hochul and Triborough Bridge and Tunnel Authority
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1446 Notice of Removal
Trucking Association of New York v. Metropolitan Transportation Authority et al
as 1:2024cv04111
Defendant:
Metropolitan Transportation Authority, Triborough Bridge and Tunnel Authority and Letitia James
Plaintiff:
Trucking Association of New York
Amicus Curiae:
United Parcel Service, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 49 U.S.C. § 14501 Preemption (federal authority of intrastate transportation)
County Of Rockland et al v. Triborough Bridge and Tunnel Authority et al
as 7:2024cv02285
Plaintiff:
County Of Rockland, County Executive Edwin J Day and Legislature Of The County Of Rockland
Defendant:
Metropolitan Transportation Authority and Triborough Bridge and Tunnel Authority
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 ss Fed. Question: Constitutionality of State Statutes
Mulgrew et al v. United States Department of Transportation et al
as 1:2024cv01644
Plaintiff:
Michael Mulgrew, Afl-Cio, Vito J. Fossella and others
Defendant:
United States Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Shailen Bhatt and others
Amicus Curiae:
New York City Municipal Labor Committee
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 4321 Review of Agency Action-Environment
New Yorkers Against Congestion Pricing Tax et al v. United States Department of Transportation et al
as 1:2024cv00367
Plaintiff:
New Yorkers Against Congestion Pricing Tax, Danny Buzzetta, Dr. Gregor Winkel and others
Defendant:
United States Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Shailen Bhatt and others
Cause Of Action: 05 U.S.C. § 702 Administrative Procedure Act
Mulgrew et al v. United States Department of Transportation et al
as 1:2024cv00081
Plaintiff:
MICHAEL MULGREW, AFL-CIO, Vito J. Fossella and others
Defendant:
United States Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Shailen Bhatt and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 4321 Review of Agency Action-Environment
SOKOLICH et al v. US DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION et al
as 2:2023cv21728
Plaintiff:
As Mayor of Fort Lee MARK SOKOLICH, RICHARD GALLER and MARK SOKOLICH
Defendant:
US DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION, FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION, in official capacity SHAILEN BHATT and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Federal Question-Injunctive & Declaratory Relief
Metropolitan Transportation Authority et al v. Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Alabama et al
as 2:2022cv00265
Defendant:
Anthem Inc formerly known as WELLPOINT INC doing business as Anthem Blue Cross Life and Health Insurance Company doing business as Blue Cross of California doing business as BLUE CROSS OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA doing business as Blue Cross of Northern C, Independence Health Group Inc and Independence Hospital Indemnity Plan Inc, Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Alabama and others
Plaintiff:
Metropolitan Transportation Authority, New York City Transit Authority, Manhattan And Bronx Surface Transit Operating Authority and others
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1 Antitrust Litigation
Metropolitan Transportation Authority et al v. Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Alabama et al
as 1:2021cv09101
Plaintiff:
Metropolitan Transportation Authority, New York City Transit Authority, Manhattan And Bronx Surface Transit Operating Authority and others
Defendant:
Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Alabama, PREMERA and Premera Blue Cross, Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Arizona, Inc. and others
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1
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.
