legal-news

Marks v. Hussein et al

25-cv-01413
Active Active litigation Sign in to follow this case
Share mail
Advertisement
description

Case Summary

The court received a payment in the case of USA vs Marks, case number 3:25-po-06112-1. This payment is related to the case Marks v. Hussein et al. The payment's significance is unclear without further context.

Latest development

1:25-cv-01413 Metropolitan Transportation Authority et al v. Duffy et al

Appeal · May 1, 2026

A Notice of Appeal was filed.

description View filing

Key Issues

  • Unknown Details
  • Court Decision
smart_toy Juryvine case summary generated from primary court records. How we verify our work.

update What Changed This Week

1 event
arrow_upward
Appeal 17 hours ago
A Notice of Appeal was filed.
receipt_long Source (filing) expand_more

Notice of Appeal ( 197

Open original open_in_new

Juryvine summaries are generated from court records. Expand "Source" on any row to see the underlying filing.

Advertisement

Case Timeline

3 events
info
Other May 2, 2026

3:25-po-06112-1 USA vs Marks

The court received a payment in the case of USA vs Marks, case number 3:25-po-06112-1. This payment is related to the case Marks v. Hussein et al. The payment's significance is unclear without further context.

arrow_upward
Appeal May 1, 2026

1:25-cv-01413 Metropolitan Transportation Authority et al v. Duffy et al

A Notice of Appeal was filed.

info
Other April 27, 2026

4:25-cv-01413 Marks v. Hussein et al

The court granted a motion to seal certain documents in the case of Marks v. Hussein et al, citing concerns for the privacy of individuals involved. The sealed documents are related to a settlement agreement reached between the parties. This decision allows the parties to keep sensitive information confidential.

Advertisement
newspaper

Press Coverage

3 articles
settings_backup_restore Data provenance expand_more

Sources tracked

3 outlets · 3 articles

Timeline events

3 records on file

Last updated

1 hour, 2 minutes ago

Juryvine aggregates docket entries from PACER/CourtListener, press coverage, and GDELT signals. Ingestion timestamps do not appear in the What Changed feed — that reflects real court activity only.