Brickman v. United States Department of Agriculture et al

Defendant: United States Department of Agriculture-Office of Inspector General and United States Department of Agriculture
Plaintiff: James R Brickman
Case Number: 3:2011cv03229
Filed: November 21, 2011
Court: Texas Northern District Court
Office: Dallas Office
County: Dallas
Presiding Judge: Royal Furgeson
Nature of Suit: Freedom of Information Act
Cause of Action: 05:552
Jury Demanded By: Plaintiff

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 Texas Northern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Brickman v. United States Department of Agriculture et al
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: United States Department of Agriculture-Office of Inspector General
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 [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: United States Department of Agriculture
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 [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: James R Brickman
Represented By: John H Carney
Represented By: Andrew Counts
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 [ 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.