Cases 1 - 8 of 8
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2021cv00092
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1681
Burbridge v. ADTRAN, Inc. et al
as 5:2020cv00050
Defendant:
Michael Foliano, Thomas R. Stanton, Roger D. Shannon and others
Plaintiff:
Michael Burbridge
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 0078 j
Burbridge v. ADTRAN, Inc. et al
as 1:2019cv09619
Defendant:
Michael Foliano, ADTRAN, Inc., Roger D. Shannon and others
Plaintiff:
Michael Burbridge
Marshall v. The City of New York
as 12-2479
Plaintiff - Appellee:
Joshua Marshall
Defendant:
John Doe, P.O.'s #1-10 Individually and in Their Official Capacities, (the name John Doe being fictitious, as the true names are presently unknown)
Defendant - Appellant:
The City of New York, Salim Randall, P.O. Shield No. 15331, Individually and in His Official Capacity and Michael Burbridge, P.O. Shield No. 15488, Individually and in His Official Capacity
Rabon et al v. The City Of New York City et al
as 1:2011cv00706
Defendant:
Assistant Chief Gerald Nelson, John Doe #1-5, Lieutenant Christopher D. Devaney and others
Plaintiff:
Naquan McCray, Ruben Rabon, Tyahmeek Daashawn Ware and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question
Marshall v. The City of New York et al
as 1:2010cv02714
Defendant:
P.O. Michael Burbridge, P.O.'s "John Doe" #1-10, P.O. Salim Randall and others
Plaintiff:
Joshua Marshall
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Navarro v. The City of New York et al
as 1:2007cv05178
Plaintiff:
Edwin Navarro
Defendant:
The City of New York, New York City Police Department, Michael Burbridge and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Sanchez v. City of New York et al
as 1:2007cv01777
Plaintiff:
Nancy Sanchez
Defendant:
City of New York, Michael Burbridge, John Does #1-3 and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights 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.
