1:24-cv-03001 M. v. The City of New York et al

1:20-cv-05116 Pierre v. City Of New York et al

Proposed Stipulation and Order ( 606

1:25-cv-01038 Daffeh v. City of New York et al

Order of Discontinuance ( 38

7:25-cv-09440 S.L. v. The City Of New York , et al

Marshal's Process Receipt and Return of Service Unexecuted ( 22

1:22-cv-09368 Poux v. City of New York et al

Notice of Appeal ( 141

1:25-cv-06675 Ahmad v. City of New York et al

Mailing Receipt

1:25-cv-04166 Ahmad v. The City of New York et al

Memorandum of Law in Support of Motion ( 65

1:26-cv-00268 Jackson v. The City of New York et al

Waiver of Service Unexecuted ( 9

1:25-cv-09451 Almarales v. The City of New York et al

Notice of Mediator Assignment

1:24-cv-01978 Savoy v. City of New York et al

1:25-cv-03441 Lopez v. The City of New York et al

In the case Lopez v. The City of New York et al, the court issued an order giving the plaintiff 30 days to file an amended complaint. This means the plaintiff must revise their initial legal claims to address issues identified by the court before the case can proceed. This step is crucial to ensure the complaint meets legal standards and clarifies the plaintiff's allegations.

1:21-cv-02302 Dominguez v. City of New York et al

A hearing was held in the case Dominguez v. City of New York to set deadlines and schedule future hearings. This step is important to organize the timeline for the case and ensure that all parties are prepared for upcoming proceedings.

1:25-cv-02994 Santiago v. City of New York et al

In the case Santiago v. City of New York, the court granted an extension of time, allowing the parties more time to complete certain legal actions or filings. This extension helps ensure that both sides have adequate opportunity to prepare their case thoroughly. It matters because it can affect the timeline and progress of the lawsuit.

1:26-cv-00527 Burgan v. City Of New York et al

In the case Burgan v. City of New York, the court recorded that the summons was successfully delivered to the defendant. This means the defendant has been officially notified about the lawsuit, allowing the case to proceed. Proper service of summons is crucial for ensuring the defendant's right to respond.

1:25-cv-06245 Atahualpa et al v. City of New York et al

In the case Atahualpa et al v. City of New York et al, the plaintiffs submitted a Memorandum of Law opposing a motion filed by the defendants. This document outlines the plaintiffs' legal arguments against the motion, aiming to persuade the court to deny it. Such filings are critical as they shape the court's understanding and decisions on procedural or substantive issues in the case.

1:24-cv-00611 Milhouse v. The City Of New York , et al

A new case titled Milhouse v. The City of New York and others was filed, separate from the original case M. v. The City of New York et al. This indicates that there may be related legal issues involving the City of New York being addressed in multiple lawsuits. It matters because it could affect how the city handles similar claims or legal challenges.

1:25-cv-02850 The City of New York v. Puff Bar et al

A new case titled 'The City of New York v. Puff Bar et al' was filed, separate from the ongoing case 'M. v. The City of New York et al.' This indicates that the city is pursuing legal action against Puff Bar and others, potentially related to regulatory or compliance issues. The filing of this case shows the city's continued efforts to address matters involving Puff Bar.

1:25-cv-10296 Williams v. THE CITY OF NEW YORK et al

In the case Williams v. The City of New York, the plaintiff has filed a formal response opposing a motion numbered 20. This means the plaintiff disagrees with a request made by the other party and has presented arguments against it. Such opposition is a critical step in the legal process as it influences how the court will decide on the motion.

1:22-cv-01354 Toner v. City Of New York et al

In the case Toner v. City of New York, the court issued an order granting more time for one of the parties to complete a required action. This extension allows the involved party additional time to prepare or respond, which can impact the pace and strategy of the case. Such orders help ensure fairness by giving parties adequate time to meet legal deadlines.

1:21-cv-08149 Phillips v. City of New York et al

In the case M. v. The City of New York and others, a related event occurred referencing the earlier case Phillips v. City of New York and others. This connection suggests that the current case may involve similar legal issues or parties, which could influence how the court approaches the matter.

1:19-cv-02216 Dorce et al v. City of New York et al

The court issued a scheduling order in the case Dorce et al v. City of New York et al, which sets deadlines and timelines for the progress of the case. This helps organize how the case will move forward and ensures that both parties follow a clear timetable. Such orders are essential for maintaining order and efficiency in legal proceedings.