NICELY v. USA
| JOSIAH E. NICELY |
| USA |
| 1:2016cv01264 |
| October 4, 2016 |
| United States Federal Claims Court |
| COFC Office |
| None |
| Lydia Kay Griggsby |
| Other |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1491 |
| None |
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing
68
REPORTED OPINION finding as moot 45 Motion for Judgment on the Administrative Record; denying 58 Motion for Judgment on the Administrative Record; granting 61 Partial Motion to Dismiss and Cross-Motion for Judgment on the Administrative Record. The Clerk is directed to enter judgment. Signed by Judge David A. Tapp. (co) Service on parties made.
|
|
Filing
15
REPORTED MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER granting 7 Motion for Remand filed by USA. Joint Status Report due by 7/14/2017. Notice of Compliance due by 12/15/2017. Signed by Judge Lydia Kay Griggsby. (atw) Copy to parties.
|
| Search for this case: NICELY v. USA | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Plaintiff: JOSIAH E. NICELY | |
| Represented By: | Charles William Gittins |
| 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 | [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Defendant: USA | |
| Represented By: | Jessica R. Toplin |
| 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 | [ Unicourt | 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.
