Edward James Harris v. Scott Frauenheim
Petitioner: Edward James Harris
Respondent: Scott Frauenheim
Case Number: 5:2014cv01736
Filed: August 21, 2014
Court: US District Court for the Central District of California
Presiding Judge: Cormac J. Carney
Presiding Judge: Jean P. Rosenbluth
Nature of Suit: Habeas Corpus (General)

Available Case Documents

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

Date Filed Document Text
October 5, 2015 Opinion or Order Filing 20 JUDGMENT by Judge Cormac J. Carney, Related to: R&R - Accepting Report and Recommendations, 19 . Under the Order Accepting Findings and Recommendations of U.S. Magistrate Judge, IT IS HEREBY ADJUDGED that this action is dismissed with prejudice. (MD JS-6, Case Terminated). (bem)
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 California Central District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Edward James Harris v. Scott Frauenheim
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Respondent: Scott Frauenheim
Represented By: Kevin R Vienna
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 ]
Petitioner: Edward James Harris
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?