LeBoeuf v. Neven et al
Respondent: Attorney General of the State of Nevada and D.W. Neven
Case Number: 2:2010cv00448
Filed: March 31, 2010
Court: US District Court for the District of Nevada
Office: Las Vegas Office
Presiding Judge: Lawrence R. Leavitt
Presiding Judge: Philip M. Pro
Nature of Suit: Habeas Corpus (General)
Cause of Action: 28 U.S.C. ยง 1651 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus
Jury Demanded By: None

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:

Date Filed Document Text
January 5, 2011 Opinion or Order Filing 3 ORDER DISMISSING CASE without Prejudice. Clerk is directed to close this action. Signed by Judge Philip M. Pro on 1/5/11. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - ASB)
Access additional case information on PACER

Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.

Access this case on the Nevada District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: LeBoeuf v. Neven et al
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Respondent: Attorney General of the State of Nevada
Represented By: Travis D. LeBoeuf
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 ]
Respondent: D.W. Neven
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.


Why Is My Information Online?