Cases
Cases 1 - 10 of 21
Caceres et al v. City of Providence Recorder of Deeds et al
as 1:2024cv00115
Plaintiff: Mirca Caceres and Guillermo Caceres
Defendant: City of Providence Recorder of Deeds, Department of Planning and Development and Marvin H. Homonoff
Benitez Caceres et al v. Amos Financial, LLC et al
as 1:2023cv00133
Plaintiff: Mirca Benitez Caceres, Guillermo Caceres, Juan C. Caceres and others
Defendant: Amos Financial, LLC, Department of Planning and Development and National Grid
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question: Civil Rights Violation
King Alvarez v. HUD, et al
as 22-3282
Plaintiff / Appellant: KING ANTHONY ALVAREZ
Defendant / Appellee: UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT, d/b/a HUD, MARCIA FUDGE, Secretary of HUD, NADAB BYNUM, Director of Community Planning and Development at HUD Philadelphia Regional Office and others
Norton v. Town of Islip
as 22-2797
Plaintiff / Appellant: Howard J. Norton
Defendant: Assistant Town Attor Erin A. Sidaras, Esq Vincent J. Messina, Jr., Richard Hoffman, individually and in his official capacity as Deputy Town Attorney for the Town of Islip and others
Defendant / Appellee: Town of Islip, County of Suffolk, Joanne Huml, individually and in her official capacity as a Town of Islip Assistant Town Attorney and Director of the Division of Law Enforcement of the Town of Islip Office of the Town Attorney and others
Rhode Island Housing and Mortgage Finance Corporation v. Johnson et al
as 1:2019cv00447
Plaintiff: Rhode Island Housing and Mortgage Finance Corporation
Defendant: Lisa Johnson, Department of Planning and Development, City of Providence and others
Sing Ng v. Bing Kung Association, et al
as 19-35350
Defendant / Appellee: JIM METZ, in its official and individual capacity of the manager of the Department of Planning and Development of the City of Seattle in 2014 and 2015, CARA BERTRON, in its official and individual capacity of Real Estate Lab Coordinator of Seattle Chinatown International District Preservation and Development Authority (SCIDpda), FAITH LUMSDEN, in its official and individual capacity of the Code Compliance Director of the Department of Planning and Development of the City of Seattle in 2014 and 2015 and others
Plaintiff / Appellant: SING CHO NG
Sing Ng v. Jim Metz, et al
as 19-35031
Defendant / Appellee: YAU SHEN CHIN, Manager, Bing Kung Association, TERENCE WONG, Newcastle Law Group, TOM CHENG, President, Bing Kung Association and others
Plaintiff / Appellant: SING CHO NG
The Bank of New York Mellon v. Mercedes et al
as 1:2018cv00570
Defendant: Adelaida D. Mercedes, Progressive Casualty Insurance Company, Rhode Island Housing and Mortgage Finance Corporation and others
Plaintiff: The Bank of New York Mellon f/k/a The Bank of New York as Trustee for the Benefit of the Certificateholders of the CWABS Inc., Asset-Backed Certificates, Series 2004-2 and The Bank of New York Mellon
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Sing Ng v. Bing Kung BL Association, et al We have downloadable decisions or orders for this case
as 18-35746
Plaintiff - Appellant: SING CHO NG
Defendant: BING KUNG BL ASSOCIATION, its directors, managers and officials in their official and individual capacities, DBA Bing Kung Bo Leung Inc (UBI 601-677-293), DBA Bing Kung Bo Leung Society (under UBI 601-858-308), JIM METZ, City of Seattle Department of Planning and Development official in his official and individual capacity, JANET HELSON, King County Superior Court official in their official and individual capacities and others
Ng v. Bing Kung Association et al We have downloadable decisions or orders for this case
as 2:2017cv01515
Plaintiff: Sing Cho Ng
Defendant: Bing Kung Association, Seattle Chinatown International District Preservation and Development Authority, Department of Planning and Development of the City of Seattle and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331

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.


Why Is My Information Online?