David Nealy, Jr. v. Dodge SP Warden
| DAVID NEALY, JR. |
| DODGE SP WARDEN |
| 26-13104 |
| August 31, 2026 |
| U.S. Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit |
| Prisoner Petitions - Habeas Corpus |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on September 3, 2026. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 2 USDC order denying COA as to Appellant David Nealy, Jr. was filed on 08/16/2026. Docket Entry 29. [Entered: 09/03/2026 10:47 AM] |
| Filing 1 HABEAS APPEAL DOCKETED. Notice of appeal filed by Appellant David Nealy, Jr. on 08/28/2026. Fee Status: Fee Not Paid. See attached docketing notice for important information, including deadlines. [Entered: 09/03/2026 10:43 AM] |
Access additional case information on PACER
Access the Case Summary and Docket Report to access additional information about this case on the U.S. Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
| Search for this case: David Nealy, Jr. v. Dodge SP Warden | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Petitioner: DAVID NEALY, JR. | |
| Represented By: | David Nealy Jr. |
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Finance | [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ] |
| Search Web | [ Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Respondent: DODGE SP WARDEN | |
| Represented By: | Christopher Michael Carr |
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Finance | [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ] |
| Search Web | [ Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
