Legal Opinion
Heath v. Warner Communications, Inc.
District Court, S.D. New York
Decided June 28, 1995No. 92 Civ. 4020 (JES)PublishedCited by 16 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
SPRIZZO, District Judge:
Plaintiff George Heath, acting pro se, brings the instant action against defendants Warner Communications, Inc., (“Warner Comm.”), 1 Steven Ross, 2 Bernard R. Sorkin (collectively “the Warner defendants”), the New York State Crime Victims Board (the “NYCV Board”), Barbara A. Leak, Diane McGrath-MeKeehnie, Lorraine Felegy, Gen-naro A. Fischetti, Angelo Petromelis, George L. Grobe 3 and Frank Marin (collectively “the Board defendants”). In this action, Heath claims, inter alia, that defendants violated his constitutional rights by applying…
2Cases cited23 opinions
- Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1986
- San Antonio Independent School District v. RodriguezSupreme Court of the United States · 1973
- Commissioner v. SunnenSupreme Court of the United States · 1948
- Federated Department Stores, Inc. v. MoitieSupreme Court of the United States · 1981
- Southern Pacific Railroad v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1897
18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by16 opinions
- New York State Crime Victims Board v. AbbottAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1998
- New York State Crime Victims Board v. AbbottAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2002
- Fairfield Sentry Limited ( In Liquidation) v. Fortis Global Custody Services N.V. n/k/a ABN AMROUnited States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. New York · 2020
- Fairfield Sentry Limited ( In Liquidation) v. Merrill Lynch Bank (Suisse) SAUnited States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. New York · 2020
- Fairfield Sentry Limited (In Liquidation) v. Beneficial Owners of Accounts Held in the Name ofUnited States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. New York · 2020
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.