Cases
Upstate Citizens for Equality v. United States of America We have downloadable decisions or orders for this case
as 15-1688
Plaintiff - Appellant: Upstate Citizens for Equality, Inc., David Brown Vickers, Richard Tallcot and others
Defendant - Appellee: United States of America, individually, and as trustee of the goods, credits and chattels of the federally recognized Indian nations and tribes situated in the State of New York, Kenneth L. Salazar, in his official capacity as Secretary of the U.S. Department of the Interior, Sally M.R. Jewell, in his official capacity as Secretary of the U.S. Department of the Interior and others
Defendant: Philip H. Hogen, in his capacity as Chairman of the National Indian Gaming Commission, National Indian Gaming Commission and Michael B. Mukasey, in his capacity as Attorney General of the United States
Movant: Oneida Indian Nation of New York
In re: Stockbridge-Munsee Comm
as 14-2333
Petitioner: Stockbridge-Munsee Community
Respondent: State of New York, Mario Cuomo, as Governor of the State of New York, New York State Department of Transportation and others
Defendant - Appellee: Town of Vernon, New York, Town of Lincoln, New York, Town of Stockbridge, New York and others
Oneida Indian Nation of New Yo v. County of Oneida, New York
as 11-3272
Plaintiff - Appellee: Oneida Indian Nation of New York State, AKA Oneida Indian Nation of New York, AKA Oneida Indians of New York, Oneida Indian Nation of Wisconsin, AKA Oneida Tribe of Indians of Wisconsin and Oneida of the Thames Council
Appellant: Bond Schoeneck & King, PLLC
Oneida Ind. NY, et al v. County of Oneida, NY, et al
as 11-3275
Plaintiff: Thames Band of Canada (Oneida), United States of America and New York Brothertown Indian Nation, by Maurice "Storm" Champlain, Vice Chief
Plaintiff - Appellee: Oneida Indian Nation of New York State, AKA Oneida Indians of New York, AKA Oneida Indian Nation of New York and Oneida Indian Nation of Wisconsin, AKA Oneida Tribe of Indians of Wisconsin
Appellant: Bond Schoeneck & King, PLLC
Defendant: County of Oneida, New York, County of Madison, New York, State of New York and others
Riches v. Cochran et al We have downloadable decisions or orders for this case
as 1:2009cv00132
Plaintiff: Jonathan Lee Riches
Defendant: Johnnie L. Cochran, Jr., Ulysses Torey, Jose Ernesto Medellin and others
Cause Of Action: Federal Question
Stockbridge-Munsee v. State of New York, et al We have downloadable decisions or orders for this case
as 3:1986cv01140
Plaintiff: Stockbridge-Munsee Community
Defendant: State of New York , Mario Cuomo , New York State Department of Transportation and others
Counter_claimant: Madison County , Oneida County, New York , Town of Augusta, New York and others
Counter_defendant: Stockbridge-Munsee Community
Movant: Oneida Indian Nation of New York
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1443
Oneida Ind. NY, et al v. County of Oneida, NY, et al We have downloadable decisions or orders for this case
as 5:1974cv00187
Plaintiff: Oneida Indian Nation of New York State , Oneida Indian Nation of Wisconsin and Thames Band of Canada (Oneida)
Intervenor_plaintiff: United States and New York Brothertown Indian Nation
Movant: Bond, Schoeneck & King
Defendant: State of New York and Madison County, New York and Oneida County, New York
Counter_claimant: State of New York
Counter_defendant: Oneida Indian Nation of New York State , Oneida Indian Nation of Wisconsin , Thames Band of Canada (Oneida) and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1362
Oneida Ind. NY, et al v. County of Oneida, NY, et al We have downloadable decisions or orders for this case
as 5:1970cv00035
Plaintiff: Oneida Indian Nation of New York State , Oneida Indian Nation of Wisconsin and Oneida of the Thames Council
Defendant: County of Oneida, New York and County of Madison, New York
Thirdparty_plaintiff: County of Oneida, New York and County of Madison, New York
Movant: Bond, Schoeneck & King
Intervenor_plaintiff: United States of America
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1362

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?