Fults v. Upton
Petitioner: Kenneth Earl Fults
Respondent: Stephen Upton
Case Number: 3:2009cv00086
Filed: July 31, 2009
Court: US District Court for the Northern District of Georgia
Office: Newnan Office
County: Spalding
Presiding Judge: Thrash
Nature of Suit: Other
Cause of Action: 28 U.S.C. ยง 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State) - Death
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
March 14, 2012 Opinion or Order Filing 71 ORDER DENYING 22 Amended Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus, filed by Kenneth Earl Fults. Signed by Judge Thomas W. Thrash, Jr on 3/14/12. (rsh)
February 4, 2011 Opinion or Order Filing 45 ORDER denying 32 Petitioner's Motion for Reconsideration. Signed by Judge Thomas W. Thrash, Jr on 2/4/11. (rsh)
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 Georgia Northern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Fults v. Upton
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Petitioner: Kenneth Earl Fults
Represented By: Lindsay Nicole Bennett
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: Stephen Upton
Represented By: Sabrina G. Graham
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?