Cases 11 - 20 of 22
Ayala-Suarez v. USPS et al
as 3:2018cv01971
Plaintiff:
Jose Luis Ayala-Suarez
Defendant:
United States of America (U.S. Postal Service) and USPS
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2674
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2018cv12144
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Delgado-Rodriguez v. United States Postal Service et al
as 3:2018cv01489
Plaintiff:
Wilson Delgado-Rodriguez
Defendant:
USPS Office of Inspector General (OIG), United States Department of Justice and United States Postal Service
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1981
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2018cv01404
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2003
USA v. Nine (9) Money Orders (Money Gram) et al
as 3:2016cv03036
Plaintiff:
USA
Defendant:
Nine (9) Money Orders (Money Gram), Six (6) Money Orders (USPS), Two (2) Money Orders (Western Union) and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1345
US v. Dumond
as 16-2134
Appellee:
UNITED STATES
Defendant - Appellant:
NICHOLE DUMOND
Interested Party:
POSTAL RESTITUTION USPS DISBURSING OFFICER
Davis v. Christus St. Francis Cabrini Hospital et al
as 1:2016fp00311
Defendant:
Christus St. Francis Cabrini Hospital, Timothy J. Dozier, Federal Bureau of Prisons and others
Plaintiff:
Lawrence Davis
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Federal Question: Bivens Act
Pickle v. USP Atlanta, Warden
as 1:2013cv00493
Petitioner:
Dennis Michael Pickle
Respondent:
USP Atlanta, Warden
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federal)
Pickle v. USP Atlanta, Warden
as 1:2013cv00492
Petitioner:
Dennis Michael Pickle
Respondent:
USP Atlanta, Warden
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federal)
Encompass Insurance Co. of Massachusetts et al v. US Postal Service
as 1:2008cv12048
Plaintiff:
Encompass Insurance Company of Massachusetts
Defendant:
USPS Postal Inspectors
Cause Of Action: U.S. Government Defendant
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.
