Here.

Link to the opinion here.
Non-decision, more like. Here are the materials in Silva v. Farrish:
Opinion here. Excerpt from the court’s syllabus:
We hold that Ex parte Young applies to the plaintiffs’ fishing-rights claims against the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (“DEC”) officials— but not against the DEC itself—because the plaintiffs allege an ongoing violation of federal law and seek prospective relief against state officials. We also hold that the plaintiffs have Article III standing to seek prospective relief and that Younger abstention no longer bars Silva from seeking prospective relief because his criminal proceedings have ended. We therefore conclude that the district court erred in granting summary judgment to the DEC officials on the plaintiffs’ claims for declaratory and injunctive relief. The district court properly granted summary judgment on the discrimination claims because there is no evidence in the record that would permit an inference of discriminatory intent.
Lower court materials here.
Here are the materials in Unkechaug Indian Nation v. Seggos (E.D. N.Y.):
Prior post here.
Here are the materials in Silva v. Farrish (E.D. N.Y.):
90 Objection to Magistrate Report
Prior briefs here.
Here are the updated materials in Silva v. Farrish (E.D. N.Y.):
83-6 Suffolk County Motion for Summary Judgment
84-8 New York Motion for Summary Judgment
Prior post here.
Here are the materials in Unkechaug Indian Nation v. New York State Dept. of Environmental Conservation (E.D. N.Y.):
Here are the materials in Edwards v. Foxwoods Resort Casino (E.D. N.Y.):
Here are the materials in Silva v. Farrish (E.D. N.Y.):
54-3 county defendants motion to dismiss
56-3 state defendants motion to dismiss
Prior post here.
UPDATE:
Here are the materials in Silva v. Farrish (E.D. N.Y.):
Briefs here.
You must be logged in to post a comment.