Cases
Search U.S. court opinions (CourtListener / Free Law Project), or resolve a reporter citation to its case via the Caselaw Access Project. Facts only — name, court, date, status, citation count. Never a holding-summary.
10 opinions for “Sampson v. Stony Brook University”
Shady v. Tysonpublic domain
5 F.Supp.2d 102 (1998) Magdy S. SHADY, M.D., Plaintiff, v. George W. TYSON, M.D., individually and in his official capacity as Chair of the Department of Neurological Surgery of University Hospital, University Medical Center and the School of Medicine at SUNY at Stony Brook; Norman H. Edelman, M.D., individually and in his official capacity as Dean of the School of Medicine and Vice President of University Medical Center and the Health Sciences C
Poor v. Parking Systems Plus, Inc.public domain
24-3324-cv Poor v. Parking Systems Plus, Inc. UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT August Term 2025 (Argued: October 8, 2025 Decided: December 19, 2025) Docket No. 24-3324-cv TERESA POOR, Regional Director of Region 29 of the National Labor Relations Board,
Davila v. Langpublic domain
GREGORY H. WOODS, United States District Judge Plaintiff Carlos Davila is the founder of A New Beginning for Immigrant's Rights, Inc. ("A New Beginning"), an immigrants' rights organization. Through A New Beginning, Davila participated in the Department of Justice's Recognition and Accreditation Program ("R & A Program"), which permitted him to represent individuals in immigration proceedings as a non-attorney. The Department of
Millar v. Ojimapublic domain
354 F.Supp.2d 220 (2005) Michelle MILLAR, and Stephen Koch, Plaintiffs, v. Iwao OJIMA, in his individual and official capacity, Defendant. No. CV 03-5511(ADS)(ARL). United States District Court, E.D. New York. January 28, 2005. *223 Scott Michael Mishkin, P.C., Islandia, NY (Scott M. Mishkin, of Counsel), for the plaintiffs.
Cavalier v. McCuepublic domain
Edward S. Conway, J. This is an application by petitioner pursuant to CPLR article 78 for an order reviewing a determination of respondent State University Construction Fund (hereinafter referred to as Fund) which denied petitioner access to certain records in the possession of the Fund. Petitioner Roland M. Cavalier is an attorney with offices in the City of Albany, New York, and petitioner Sampson Window Co
MEMORANDUM OPINION ELLEN LIPTON HOLLANDER, District Judge. The Whiting-Turner Contracting Company (“Whiting-Turner”), plaintiff, sued its purported insurer, Liberty Mutual Insurance Co. (“Liberty Mutual”), defendant, based on Liberty Mutual’s belated decision to deny coverage to Whiting-Turner with respect to a lawsuit filed against Whiting-Turner in a Nevada state court (the “Nevada Suit”).
Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc. v. Sandoz, Inc.public domain
Opinion and Order BARBARA S. JONES, District Judge. TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION ..............................................................303 I. The Parties .............................................................304 A. Teva ................................................................304 B.
Matter of Sayeh R.public domain
91 N.Y.2d 306 (1997) 693 N.E.2d 724 670 N.Y.S.2d 377 In the Matter of Sayeh R. and Another, Children Alleged to be Neglected. Monroe County Department of Social Services, Appellant; Patricia Ann P., Respondent. Court of Appeals of the State of New York. Argued October 15, 1997 Decided December 22, 1997. Charles S. Turner
632 F.Supp. 785 (1986) Thomas J. MARZEN, Plaintiff, v. UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, et al., Defendants. No. 84 C 1225. United States District Court, N.D. Illinois, E.D. April 4, 1986. *786 *787 Clarke D. Forsythe, Chicago, Ill., for plaintiff. Anton R. Valukas,
Terminal Investment Co. v. Pope Estate Co.public domain
THE COURT. This appeal was taken from a judgment entered upon the sustaining of a demurrer to an amended and supplemental complaint, without leave to amend. The action was brought to recover $7,317.04 paid under protest by appellant to respondent as reimbursement for income taxes paid on rental it had received from appellant for the years 1920 to 1923, inclusive. Incidentally, it was for a decree declaratory of the rights and duties of the parties under the tax covenant of the lease, b