Legal Opinion
Kassim v. City of Schenectady
District Court, N.D. New York
Decided April 3, 2003No. 1:02-cv-00186PublishedCited by 6 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM-DECISION and ORDER
HURD, District Judge.
I. INTRODUCTION
Plaintiff Khaled Kassim (“plaintiff’), pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, brought suit against defendants City of Schenectady (“the city” or “defendants”) and Michael T. Brockbank (“Broekbank” or “defendants”), alleging that defendants’ seizure of his business and property on April 23, 2001, violated the procedural due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment of the Constitution.
Both plaintiff and defendants filed motions for summary judgment pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 56; plaintiff for partial summary judgment on the issue of…
2Cases cited28 opinions
- Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, Administratrix of the Estate of CatrettSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Matsushita Electric Industrial Co., Ltd. v. Zenith Radio CorporationSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Mathews v. EldridgeSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
- Mullane v. Central Hanover Bank & Trust Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1950
23 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Khaled Kassim v. City of Schenectady and Michael T. BrockbankCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2005
- Reyes v. County of SuffolkDistrict Court, E.D. New York · 2014
- Canzoneri v. Incorporated Village of Rockville CentreDistrict Court, E.D. New York · 2013
- Kassim v. City of SchenectadyDistrict Court, N.D. New York · 2003
- Myles v. JacobsDistrict Court, E.D. New York · 2019
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.