District Court for the Eastern District of New York Court Cases

Search
  1. In Re Agent Orange Product Liability Lit. (1985)

    Leonard Rivkin, Rivkin, Leff, Sherman & Radler, Garden City, N.Y., Philip Pakula, Townley & Updike, Wendell B. Alcorn, Jr., Cadwalader, Wickersham & Taft, William Krohley, Kelley, Drye & Warren, Thomas Beck, Arthur, Dry & Kalish, New York City, Bruce Hecker, Shea & Gould, New York City, of counsel, David R. Gross, Budd, Larner, Kent, Gross, Picillo & Rosenbaum, New York City, Paul V. Esposito, Lewis, Overbeck & Furman, Chicago, Ill., Henry G. Miller, Clark, [...]

    Court: District Court for the Eastern District of New York Docket: MDL No. 381
  2. In Re Agent Orange Product Liability Litigation (1984)

    Stephen J. Schlegel, Schlegel & Trafelet, Ltd., Chicago, Ill.; Benton Musslewhite, Law Offices of Benton Musslewhite, Inc., Houston, Tex.; Thomas Henderson, Henderson & Goldberg, Pittsburgh, Pa.; Phillip E. Brown, Hoberg, Finger, Brown, Cox & Molligan, San Francisco, Cal.; Stanley Chesley, Waite, Schneider, Bayless & Chesley, Cincinnati, Ohio; John M. O'Quinn, O'Quinn, Hagans & Wettman, Houston, Tex.; Neil R. Peterson and Gene Locks, Greitzer & Locks, Philadelphia, [...]

    Court: District Court for the Eastern District of New York Docket: MDL No. 381
  3. Mojica v. Reno (1997)

    This is an important case of first impression, the resolution of which will affect the rights of many legal permanent residents. Petitioners, long time United States residents, seek a court ruling that they are entitled to a hearing determining whether they should not be deported because of humanitarian factors — commonly known as section 212(c) relief. At issue is the new policy and practice of the United States Attorney General to automatically deport certain legal permanent residents. Her [...]

    Court: District Court for the Eastern District of New York Docket: CV 97-1085(JBW), CV 97-1869(JBW)
  4. United States v. Turner (1987)

    This is an action for damages arising from defendant's alleged breach of two scholarship agreements made pursuant to the Public Health Service ("PHS") Scholarship Training Program, 42 U.S.C. § 234 (repealed 1976), and the National Health Service Corp ("NHSC") Scholarship Program, 42 U.S.C. § 254l-o. Defendant is a medical doctor who practices general medicine and who appears in this action pro se.[1] The matter is before the Court on plaintiff's motion for an order pursuant to Rule 56 [...]

    Court: District Court for the Eastern District of New York Docket: CV-85-0138
  5. United States v. Fatico (1978)

    David G. Trager, U. S. Atty., E. D. N. Y., Brooklyn, N. Y. (Robert J. Lynn, Sp. Atty., U. S. Dept. of Justice, Organized Crime Task Force, Paul F. Corcoran, Asst. U. S. Atty., Brooklyn, N. Y., of counsel), for plaintiff.


    Court: District Court for the Eastern District of New York Docket: 76-CR-81
  6. Uniroyal, Inc. v. Home Ins. Co. (1988)

    This lawsuit is part of the "Agent Orange" Product Liability Litigation. In the underlying mass toxic tort action, a class of approximately 2.5 million Vietnam veterans and their family members sued the United States and the manufacturers of phenoxy herbicides used in the Vietnam war. The plaintiffs alleged that exposure to the herbicides and the contaminant dioxin resulted in a variety of devastating maladies, including cancers, genetic damage and birth defects, skin diseases, and nervous [...]

    Court: District Court for the Eastern District of New York Docket: CV-84-3999 (JBW)
  7. In Re Agent Orange Product Liability Litigation (1980)

    Victor J. Yannacone, Jr., Yannacone & Yannacone, Patchogue, N. Y., Schlegel & Trafelet, Ltd., L. Steven Platt, Daniel C. Sullivan, Sullivan Associates, Ltd., Chicago, Ill., Hy Mayerson, Spring City, Pa., David Jaroslawicz, New York City, Newton B. Schwartz, P. C., Benton Musslewhite, Inc., Houston, Tex., Dorothy Thompson, Los Angeles, Cal., W. T. McMillan, W. T. McMillan & Co., associated counsel for Australian plaintiffs, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia, Jerry G. Wieslander, [...]

    Court: District Court for the Eastern District of New York Docket: MDL No. 381
  8. United States v. Lopez (1971)

    Defendant is charged with concealing and facilitating the transportation of heroin and of conspiring to commit that crime. 21 U.S.C. §§ 173, 174. He has moved to suppress heroin taken from his person.


    Court: District Court for the Eastern District of New York Docket: 70 Cr 813
  9. City of New York v. United States (1972)

    William C. Mahoney, Washington, D. C., for intervening plaintiffs, United Transportation Union and Brotherhood of Railway, Airline & Steamship Clerks, Freight Handlers, Express & Station Employes.


    Court: District Court for the Eastern District of New York Docket: Civ. No. 71-C-1639
  10. Hall v. EI Du Pont De Nemours & Co., Inc. (1972)

    These two cases arise out of eighteen separate accidents scattered across the nation in which children were injured by blasting caps. Damages are sought from manufacturers and their trade association, the Institute of Makers of Explosives (I.M.E.). The basic allegation is that the practice of the explosives industry during the 1950's—continuing until 1965—of not placing any warning upon individual blasting caps and of failing to take other safety measures created an unreasonable risk of harm [...]

    Court: District Court for the Eastern District of New York Docket: 69-C-273, 70-C-1107
  11. Eastway Const. Corp. v. City of New York (1986)

    This matter was remanded for the awarding of attorney's fees under Rule 11 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and 42 U.S.C. § 1988. Eastway Construction Corp. v. City of New York, 762 F.2d 243 (2d Cir.1985)("Eastway I"). For the reasons indicated below, a modest portion of defendant's attorney's fees is assessed against the plaintiffs, while no fees are assessed against plaintiffs' counsel.


    Court: District Court for the Eastern District of New York Docket: CV-84-0690
  12. In Re Visa Check/Mastermoney Antitrust Litigation (2003)

    Kevin J. Arquit, Joseph F. Tringali, Simpson Thacher & Bartlett LLP, New York City, Kenneth A. Gallo, Clifford Chance LLP, Washington, DC, for Defendant MasterCard International Incorporated.


    Court: District Court for the Eastern District of New York Docket: 96 CV 5238(JG)
  13. In Re"Agent Orange" Product Liability Litigation (1984)

    David J. Dean, Dean, Falanga, Sinrod & Rose, Carle Place, N.Y., Stephen J. Schlegel, Schlegel & Trafelet, Ltd., Chicago, Ill., Thomas W. Henderson, Pittsburgh, Pa., Benton Musselwhite, Houston, Tex., Aaron Twerski, Hempstead, N.Y., of counsel, for plaintiffs.


    Court: District Court for the Eastern District of New York Docket: MDL 381
  14. Moscarelli v. Stamm (1968)

    This is an action by the plaintiffs individually and on behalf of others who purchased securities during 1965 and 1966 through the brokerage firm of A. L. Stamm & Co., to recover damages for losses resulting from numerous trades on a national securities exchange. Jurisdiction is predicated upon 15 U.S. C.A. §§ 77v and 78aa.


    Court: District Court for the Eastern District of New York Docket: 67-C-520
  15. New York St. Ass'n for Retard. Child., Inc. v. Rockefeller (1973)

    Louis J. Lefkowitz, Atty. Gen., State of New York, New York City, by Brenda Soloff, Judith Gordon, Asst. Attys. Gen., for defendants; and Judith T. Kramer, Deputy Asst. Atty. Gen., of counsel.


    Court: District Court for the Eastern District of New York Docket: 73-C-55, 73-C-113
  16. In Re Agent Orange Product Liability Litigation (1982)

    Victor J. Yannacone, Jr., Yannacone & Yannacone, Patchogue, N. Y., Schlegel & Trafelet, Ltd., L. Steven Platt, Daniel C. Sullivan, Sullivan Associates, Ltd., Chicago, Ill., Hy Mayerson, Spring City, Pa., David Jaroslawicz, New York City, Newton B. Schwartz, P. C., Benton Musslewhite, Inc., Houston, Tex., Dorothy Thompson, Los Angeles, Cal., W. T. McMillan, W. T. McMillan & Co., associated counsel for Australian plaintiffs, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia, Jerry G. Wieslander, [...]

    Court: District Court for the Eastern District of New York Docket: MDL No. 381
  17. Bulova Watch Co., Inc. v. K. Hattori & Co., Ltd. (1981)

    This motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction (F.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(2)), presents a classic problem in adjudicating claims against a multinational corporation using subsidiaries to penetrate the American market. Under current doctrine, to be subject to personal jurisdiction by a state, the parent must 1) itself be present because it is doing business in the state (N.Y. CPLR 301); or, 2) under a "long arm" concept, have conducted specific activities out of which the cause of action arose [...]

    Court: District Court for the Eastern District of New York Docket: 79 C 2543
  18. Feit v. Leasco Data Processing Equipment Corporation (1971)

    This case raises the question of the degree of candor required of issuers of securities who offer their shares in exchange for those of other companies in take-over operations. Defendants' registration statement was, we find, misleading in a material way. While disclosing masses of facts and figures, it failed to reveal one critical consideration that weighed heavily with those responsible for the issue—the substantial possibility of being able to gain control of some hundred million dollars [...]

    Court: District Court for the Eastern District of New York Docket: 69 Civ. 1329
  19. United States Ex Rel. Edney v. Smith (1976)

    Petitioner seeks a writ of habeas corpus. 28 U.S.C. § 2254. He was found guilty in a New York State court of the kidnapping and killing of the eight-year-old daughter of his former girlfriend. People v. Edney, 39 N.Y.2d 620, 385 N.Y.S.2d 23, 350 N.E.2d 400 (1976). His claim now is that the State violated his federal constitutional rights by calling a psychiatrist who had interviewed petitioner before trial at his counsel's request. While the rules of privilege relied upon by petitioner are [...]

    Court: District Court for the Eastern District of New York Docket: 76-C-1289
  20. Weight Watch. of Quebec Ltd. v. Weight W. Int., Inc. (1975)

    This is a diversity action brought by two Canadian franchisees, Weight Watchers of Quebec Ltd. ("WW Quebec") and Weight Watchers of Manitoba Ltd. ("WW Manitoba"), alleging breach of a franchise agreement by defendant-franchisor, Weight Watchers International, Inc. ("WWI"). WWI has moved for summary judgment dismissing the entire action; plaintiffs have cross-moved to amend the complaint.


    Court: District Court for the Eastern District of New York Docket: 73 C 1121

1 of 390 Page(s)

Page:
  1. 2
  2. 3
  3. 4
  4. 5