• All Courts
  • Federal Courts
  • Bankruptcies
  • PTAB
  • ITC
Track Search
Export
Download All
Active Filters1
5 results

Brian Burke, Petitioner v. Housing and Services, Inc., et al.

Docket 24-927, Supreme Court of the United States (Feb. 26, 2025)
Deadline(Response due March 28, 2025) Petition Certificate of Word Count Proof of Service Appendix
Petitioner Brian Burke
cite Cite Docket
Analyze

Petition for a writ of certiorari filed - Proof of Service

Document Brian Burke, Petitioner v. Housing and Services, Inc., et al., 24-927, Petition for a writ of certiorari filed, Proof of Service (U.S. Sep. 26, 2024)
Respondents SONY #18-cv-4496(PGG)(GWG) ) AFFIRMATION OF Service ) 5 6
I, Brian Burke, declare, certify, verify, and state under 14 penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct.
Executed on Monday, February 10, 2025: Plaintiff/ Appellant, served three (3) copies each on Appellees NYCT , General Counsel David Farber 130 Livingston Street fl 12, Brooklyn, NY 11201, NYS Attorney General, Letitia James 28 Liberty Street fl 16 New 20 York, NY 10005, Kenmore/HSI Malapero Prisco & Klauber 271 Madison Ave. fl 17 New York, NY 10016.
Brian Burke 02/10/2025 \ AFFIRMATION OF Service
cite Cite Document
Analyze

Petition for a writ of certiorari filed - Petition

Document Brian Burke, Petitioner v. Housing and Services, Inc., et al., 24-927, Petition for a writ of certiorari filed, Petition (U.S. Sep. 26, 2024)
In addition, in an EDNY case, NYCT used Labor Law 190 (“Employer” includes any person, corporation, limited liability company, or association employing any individual in any occupation, industry, trade, business or service.
See “Again with l.a material factual or legal matter was overlooked in the decision; we address page 5 paragraph 2; “Burke next argues that the district court erred by refusing to toll the statute of limitations for his defamation and medical malpractice claims against the City and Bellevue.
As to...” And more “Next, the Summary Order states “And while Burke contends that the district court erred in dismissing his claim against the Transit Authority under the Racketeer Influenced and Organizations Act (“RICO”), 18 U.S.C. § 1964(c), he argues only that RICO should apply to public agencies.
But Kenmore’s good faith - or lack thereof - during mediation had no bearing on the district court’s grant of summary judgment, which instead turned on the fact that Burke failed to demonstrate that Kenmore was a state actor or had committed RICO predicate acts.
Sounds like an excellent reason to Reverse and Remand instant case back to SDNY for Jury Trial, and for the USSC to strike the mentioned sentence in LL 190 that denies us Public Employees in New York Remedy for Wage Theft.
cite Cite Document
Analyze

Petition for a writ of certiorari filed - Certificate of Word Count

Document Brian Burke, Petitioner v. Housing and Services, Inc., et al., 24-927, Petition for a writ of certiorari filed, Certificate of Word Count (U.S. Sep. 26, 2024)
CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE No. Brian Burke, Petitioner(s) vs. Housing and Services, Inc., et al. Respondent(s) As required by Supreme Court Rule 33.1(h), I certify that the petition for a writ of certiorari contains 3795 words, excluding the parts of the petition that are exempted by Supreme Court Rule 33.1(d).
I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct.
Executed on February 10, 2025, Brian Burke
cite Cite Document
Analyze

Petition for a writ of certiorari filed - Appendix

Document Brian Burke, Petitioner v. Housing and Services, Inc., et al., 24-927, Petition for a writ of certiorari filed, Appendix (U.S. Sep. 26, 2024)
Mere conclusory allegations or denials . . . cannot by themselves create a genuine issue of material fact where none would otherwise exist.” Hicks v. Baines.
TT.ANALYSIS A.Obiections to the R&R’s Factual Statement Burke objects to certain aspects of Judge Gorenstein’s factual statement. (Pltf. Obj. (Dkt. No. 192) at 3-7) None of Burke’s objections has merit.
... not rely on mere speculation or conjecture as to the true nature of the facts to overcome a motion for summary judgment [M]ere conclusory allegations or denials cannot by themselves create a genuine issue of material fact where none ...
) Plaintiff also contends that - although his prior lawsuits were dismissed - they nonetheless had merit.
Nonetheless, it is difficult to tell what claims it makes against the Kenmore defendants.
The defendants have supplied some evidence that describes their interactions with plaintiff, none of which is contradicted by plaintiff in admissible form.
Nonetheless, “proceeding pro se does not otherwise relieve a litigant of the usual requirements of summary judgment, and a pro se party’s bald assertions unsupported by evidence are insufficient to overcome a motion for summary ...
cite Cite Document
Analyze
+ More Snippets

Can’t find a case you think should be here?

Use our supplemental search tool to find dockets that you may not see here. Information on Fees

Start a Supplemental Search