Cases 1 - 10 of 13
Robert Neal v. USPS
as 13-2639
Plaintiff - Appellant:
ROBERT DAVID NEAL
Defendant - Appellee:
UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE
NEAL v. THE UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE
as 2:2013cv00209
Plaintiff:
ROBERT DAVID NEAL
Defendant:
THE UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2671 Federal Tort Claims Act
NEAL v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA et al
as 2:2013cv00196
Plaintiff:
ROBERT DAVID NEAL
Defendant:
JOHN C. OLIVER, A. RUPSKA, CHARLES E. SAMUELS, JR. and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2671 Federal Tort Claims Act
NEAL v. THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA et al
as 2:2013cv00188
Defendant:
TERESER A. BANKS, F. TIMOTHY COLEMAN, STEPHEN COPE and others
Plaintiff:
ROBERT DAVID NEAL
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2671 Federal Tort Claims Act
NEAL v. OLIVER
as 2:2012cv00364
Plaintiff:
ROBERT DAVID NEAL
Defendant:
JOHN C. OLIVER
Cause Of Action: 05 U.S.C. § 552 Right to Privacy Act
NEAL v. OLIVER et al
as 2:2012cv00298
Defendant:
THOMAS R. KANE, CHARLES L. LOCKETT, AMBER L. NELSON and others
Plaintiff:
ROBERT DAVID NEAL
Cause Of Action: 05 U.S.C. § 552 Right to Privacy Act
NEAL v. KANE
as 1:2012cv01212
Plaintiff:
ROBERT D. NEAL
Defendant:
THOMAS R. KANE
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
NEAL v. COLEMAN et al
as 2:2012cv00101
Defendant:
TERESER A. BANKS, F. TIMOTHY COLEMAN, CHRISTOPHER A. GREINER and others
Interested Party:
JO ANN BARNHART and LONNIE G. SCHMIDT
Plaintiff:
ROBERT DAVID NEAL
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Federal Question: Bivens Act
NEAL v. COLEMAN et al
as 2:2012cv00040
Defendant:
F TIMOTHY COLEMAN, JANE DOE, JOHN DOE and others
Plaintiff:
ROBERT DAVID NEAL
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Federal Question: Bivens Act
NELSON v. LOCKETT
as 2:2011cv00209
Defendant:
CHARLES L. LOCKETT
Plaintiff:
ROBERT DAVID NEAL and DAVID J. NELSON
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
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.
