Cases 1 - 8 of 8
Byfield v. New York City Department of Education (NYCDOE)
as 24-219
Plaintiff / Appellant:
MEGAN S. BYFIELD
Defendant / Appellee:
NEW YORK CITY DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION, (NYC DOE)
Defendant:
DISTRICT COUNCIL 37, NEW YORK STATE DIVISION OF HUMAN RIGHTS, LIZ VLADECK and others
Byfield v. New York City Department of Education (NYCDOE)
as 24-89
Plaintiff / Appellant:
MEGAN S. BYFIELD
Defendant / Appellee:
NEW YORK CITY DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION, (NYCDOE)
Defendant:
DISTRICT COUNCIL 37, (DC37), NEW YORK STATE DIVISION OF HUMAN RIGHTS, (DHR), LIZ VLADECK, General Counsel, NYCDOE, Office of Legal Services and others
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2022cv05869
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 12112 Americans with Disabilities Act - Employment Discrimination
Robert Johnson v. Andrew Cuomo
as 22-1156
Plaintiff / Appellant:
ROBERT W. JOHNSON
Defendant / Appellee:
ANDREW M. CUOMO, JOHNATHAN JAMES SMITH, WILLIAM LAMOT and others
Johnson v. Cuomo et al
as 1:2022cv00079
Plaintiff:
Robert W Johnson
Defendant:
Andrew Cuomo, Johnathan J Smith, William LaMot and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Federal Question
Tull v. New York City Housing Authorit
as 16-3609
Plaintiff - Appellant:
Rosalinda Tull
Defendant - Appellee:
New York City Housing Authority
Defendant:
New York City Housing Authority-Penn-Wortman Houses Management Office, Edith Atkins-John, Manager, Francia Astudillo, Housing Assistant and others
Tull v. NYCHA-Penn-Wortman Houses Management Office et al
as 1:2016cv01010
Defendant:
Francia Astudillo, Edith Atkins-John, Denise Brockington and others
Plaintiff:
Rosalinda Tull
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question
Davis v. Arroyo et al
as 1:2009cv01703
Plaintiff:
Thomas Davis
Defendant:
Jose Arroyo, Mark Mereegen, Brain Sullivman (MFY) and others
Cause Of Action: Federal Question
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.
