Cases filed in the Second Circuit Courts
Demarest v. Town of Underhill
as 24-147
Plaintiff / Appellant: DAVID P. DEMAREST
Defendant / Appellee: TOWN OF UNDERHILL, a municipality and charter town, DANIEL STEINABAUER, as an individual and in official capacity as Selectboard Chair, BOB STONE, as an individual and in official capacity and others
Kakar Kurtz v. Dr. Marie Lupica
as 23-7548
Plaintiff / Appellant: SHVETA KAKAR KURTZ, DANIEL L. KURTZ, solely in their roles as parentguardians, AMNA KAKAR KURTZ, a minor child and others
Defendant / Appellee: MARIE LUPICA, as an individual, Treating Physician and State Actor Operating Under Color of Law and NEW YORK PRESBYTERIAN HOSPITAL, /WeillCornell Medical Center
Defendant: DAVID HANSELL, as the Duly Appointed Commissioner of the New York City Administration for Children's Services, DIVISION OF CHILD PROTECTION, CITY OF NEW YORK and others
Demarest v. Underhill
as 22-956
Plaintiff / Appellant: David P. Demarest and David Parsons Demarest
Defendant / Appellee: Town of Underhill, a municipality and charter town, Daniel Steinabauer, as an individual and in official capacity as Selectboard Chair, Bob Stone, as an individual and in official capacity and others
Defendant: Front Porch Forum, as a Public Benefit 15 Corporation fairly treated as acting under color of law due to past and present 16 factual considerations while serving the traditional governmental role of providing 17 "Essential Civic Infrastructure" rangi and Jericho Underhill Land Trust, as NonProfit 21 Corporation fairly treated as acting under color of law due to past and present 22 factual considerations and a special relationship willfully participating in and 23 actively directing acquisition of mun
Ronnie Van Zant, Inc. v. Artimus Pyle We have downloadable decisions or orders for this case
as 17-2849
Plaintiff: ABC
Plaintiff - Appellee: Ronnie Van Zant, Inc., Gary R. Rossington, Johnny Van Zant and others
Defendant: DEF, Artimus Pyle, AKA Thomas D. Pyle, John Doe and others
Defendant - Appellant: Cleopatra Records, Inc and Cleopatra Films, a division of Cleopatra Records, Inc
Stritzinger v. Carne
as 16-3887
Petitioner - Appellant: John S. Stritzinger
Respondent - Appellee: Edward Earl Carnes, Chief Judge of the 11th Circuit, Lowell McAdam, Chief Executive of Verizon, Sarah Deutsche, SVP of Verizon Legal and others
Trustees of the Laundry, Dry Cleaning Workers and Allied Industries Health Fund, Workers United et al v. Mrs. Roles Private Launderers, Inc.
as 7:2013cv01190
Plaintiff: Trustees of the Laundry, Dry Cleaning Workers and Allied Industries Health Fund, Workers United and Trustees of the Laundry, Dry Cleaning Workers and Allied Industries Retirement Fund, Workers United
Defendant: Mrs. Roles Private Launderers, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 1145 E.R.I.S.A.
U.S. Bank National Association v. Black Diamond CLO 2005
as 12-133
Plaintiff - Appellee: U.S. Bank National Association, as Trustee
Defendant: Embassy & Company, solely as registered owner of record for the benefit of others of Notes under the Indenture, Hare & Company, Enginerig & Company, solely as registered owner of record for the benefit of others of Notes under the Indenture and others
Defendant - Appellee: Metropolitan Life Insurance Company, Metlife Reinsurance Company of South Carolina and Prudential Fixed Income
Defendant - Appellant: Black Diamond CLO 2005-1 Adviser, L.L.C. and BDC Finance L.L.C.
Laundry, Dry Cleaning Workers and Allied Industries Health Fund, Workers United et al v. Mrs. Role's Private Launderers, Inc.
as 7:2010cv04158
Petitioner: Laundry, Dry Cleaning Workers and Allied Industries Health Fund, Workers United , Laundry, Dry Cleaning Workers and Allied Industries Retirement Fund, Workers United and Laundry, Dry Cleaning Workers and Allied Industries Legal and Education Fund, Workers United
Respondent: Mrs. Role's Private Launderers, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 1001

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?