Cases
Cases 21 - 30 of 141
Antonyuk v. Hochul
as 22-2908
Plaintiff / Appellee: Ivan Antonyuk, Corey Johnson, Alfred Terrille and others
Defendant: William Fitzpatrick, in his Official Capacity as the Onondaga County District Attorney, Eugene Conway, in his Official Capacity as the Sheriff of Onondaga County, P. David Soares, in his Official Capacity as the District Attorney of Albany County and others
Defendant / Appellant: Joseph Cecile, Steven A. Nigrelli, in his Official Capacity as Acting Superintendent of the New York State Police and Matthew J. Doran, in his Official Capacity as the Licensing official of Onondaga County
Tripathy v. Feuz
as 22-2845
Plaintiff / Appellant: Sanjay Tripathy
Defendant / Appellee: Maria Feuz, Social Worker, Jaqueline Reid, Sex Offender Rehabilitation Counselor, Luis Gonzalez, Assistant Deputy Superintendent of Programs, Fishkill Correctional Facility and others
Defendant: Department of Corrections and Community Supervision, New York State Board of Parole, New York State Board of Examiners for Sex Offenders and others
Does v. Hochul
as 22-2858
Plaintiff / Appellant: John Does, 1-2, Jane Does, 1-3, Jack Does, 1-750 and others
Defendant / Appellee: Kathy Hochul, in her official capacity as Governor of the State of New York, Howard A. Zucker, in his official capacity as Commissioner of the New York State Department of Health, Trinity Health, Inc. and others
Jeffery v. City of New York
as 22-2745
Plaintiff / Appellant: Lamel Jeffery, On Behalf of Himself and Others Similarly Situated, Thaddeus Blake, On Behalf of Himself and Others Similarly Situated and Chayse Pena, On Behalf of Himself and Others Similarly Situated
Defendant / Appellee: City of New York, Eric Adams, Mayor of New York City, Individually and in his Official Capacity, Bill De Blasio, individually and others
Defendant: Kathy Hochul, Governor of the State of New York, Individually and in her Official Capacity and P.O.s John Doe #1-50, Individually and in their Official Capacity, (the name John Doe being fictitious, as the true names are presently unknown)
Antonyuk v. Hochul
as 22-2403
Plaintiff / Appellee: Ivan Antonyuk, Corey Johnson, Alfred Terrille and others
Defendant: William Fitzpatrick, in his Official Capacity as the Onondaga County District Attorney, Eugene Conway, in his Official Capacity as the Sheriff of Onondaga County, P. David Soares, in his Official Capacity as the District Attorney of Albany County and others
Defendant / Appellant: Joseph Cecile
Petitioner: Gerard Gardner
Antonyuk v. Hochul
as 22-2379
Plaintiff / Appellee: Ivan Antonyuk, Corey Johnson, Alfred Terrille and others
Defendant: William Fitzpatrick, in his Official Capacity as the Onondaga County District Attorney, Eugene Conway, in his Official Capacity as the Sheriff of Onondaga County, Joseph Cecile and others
Defendant / Appellant: Kathleen Hochul, Kevin P. Bruen, in his Official Capcity as Superintendent of the New York State Police, Matthew J. Doran, in his Official Capacity as the Licensing official of Onondaga County and others
Petitioner: Gerard Gardner
Brown Bey v. State of New York (Inc) et al We have downloadable decisions or orders for this case
as 1:2022cv03408
Plaintiff: Jayde Brown Bey
Defendant: State of New York (Inc), Kathleen Courtney Hochul (Foreign Occidental European Femal) doing business as Kathleen Hochul (Acting Governor for The State of New York Inc.)), Letitia James and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. ยง 1331 Fed. Question
Oriska Corporation v. Troy Operating Co. LLC
as 22-1139
Plaintiff / Appellee: Oriska Corporation, individually and derivatively to Carrier Defendant Oriska Insurance Company
Defendant: Troy Operating Co. LLC, (Diamond) Employer-Defendant, Bent Philipson, Owner-Defendant, The Philipson Family Trust, Prohibited Transaction Defendant and others
Defendant / Appellant: Donna Hodge, as the Class Representative of a Class of Employees of Employer Defendants as the interest of the Class may appear, Class Defendant, Annette Hall, as the Class Representative of a Class of Employees of Employer Defendants as the interest of the Class may appear, Class Defendant, Karen Grant Williams, as the Class Representative of a Class of Employees of Employer Defendants as the interest of the Class may appear, Class Defendant and others
Oriska Corporation v. Highgate LTC Management, LLC
as 22-1155
Plaintiff / Appellee: Oriska Corporation, individually and derivatively to Carrier-Defendant Oriska Insurance Company
Defendant: Highgate LTC Management, LLC, Employer-Defendant, DBA Northwoods Rehabilitaion & Extended Care, Eugene Nachamkin, Owner-Defendant, Diana R. Koehler, Owner-Defendant and others
Defendant / Appellant: Donna Hodge, as the Class Representative of a Class of Employees of Employer Defendants as the interests of the Class may appear, Class Defendant, Annette Hall, as the Class Representative of a Class of Employees of Employer Defendants as the interests of the Class may appear, Class Defendant, Karen Grant Williams, as the Class Representative of a Class of Employees of Employer Defendants as the interests of the Class may appear, Class Defendant and others
Oriska Corporation v. Niskayuna Operating Co., LLC
as 22-1126
Plaintiff / Appellee: Oriska Corporation, individually and derivatively to Carrier-Defendant Oriska Insurance Company
Defendant: Niskayuna Operating Co., LLC, Employer-Defendant, Bent Philipson, Owner-Defendant, The Philipson Family Trust, Prohibited Transaction Defendants and others
Defendant / Appellant: Donna Hodge, Class Representatives of a Class of Employees of Employer Defendants as the interests of the Class may appearClass Defendant, Annette Hall, Representatives of a Class of Employees of Employer Defendants as the interests of the Class may appear, Class Defendant, Karen Grant Williams, as the Class Representatives of a Class of Employees of Employer Defendants as the interests of the Class may appear, Class Defendant and others

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?