Cases 51 - 58 of 58
Burke v. Metropolitan Transportation Au
as 10-97
Plaintiff - Appellant:
Brian Burke
Defendant - Appellee:
Metropolitan Transportation Authority, NYC Transit Authority, Public Employment Relations Board and others
Jones v. Bruchy et al
as 8:2009cv02430
Plaintiff:
Darryl Heath Jones
Defendant:
Robert Bruchy, Aurthur Smith, Bernard W. Semler and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Burke v. Metropolitan Transportation Authority et al
as 1:2009cv03291
Plaintiff:
Brian Burke
Defendant:
Metropolitan Transportation Authority, NYC Transit Authority, Public Employment Relations Board and others
Cause Of Action: Federal Question
Kenmore Associates, L.P. et al v. Burke
as 1:2008cv02431
Plaintiff:
Kenmore Associates, L.P., Housing & Service Inc. and Norris Mclaughlin & Marcus
Defendant:
Brian Burke, .
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
BURKE v. RECORD PRESS, INC.
as 1:2008cv00364
Plaintiff:
BRIAN BURKE
Defendant:
RECORD PRESS, INC.
Counter_claimant:
RECORD PRESS, INC.
Counter_defendant:
BRIAN BURKE
Cause Of Action: 31 U.S.C. § 3729
Burke v. Solomon Acosta & Fascore et al
as 1:2007cv09933
Plaintiff:
Brian Burke
Defendant:
Solomon Acosta & Fascore, Great West and MTA/NYC Transit Authority
Cause Of Action: 18 U.S.C. § 1961 Racketeering (RICO) Act
BURKE v. A P GREEN INDUSTRIES, INC. et al
as 2:2007cv69774
Plaintiff:
BRIAN BURKE
Defendant:
A P GREEN INDUSTRIES, INC., ARMSTRONG WORLD INDUSTRIES, INC., ASBESTOS CLAIMS MANAGEMENT CORPORATION and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Asbestos Litigation
Securities and Exchange Commission v. Symbol Technologies, Inc. et al
as 2:2004cv02276
Plaintiff:
Securities and Exchange Commission
Defendant:
Symbol Technologies, Inc., Tomo Razmilovic, Kenneth Jaeggi and others
Interested Party:
Anna-Christina Razmilovic
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 78 m(a) Securities Exchange Act
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.
