Moultry v. Hastings
Petitioner: Adrian Moultry
Respondent: Suzanne Hastings
Case Number: 2:2014cv00165
Filed: November 3, 2014
Court: US District Court for the Southern District of Georgia
Office: Brunswick Office
County: Wayne
Presiding Judge: James E. Graham
Presiding Judge: Lisa G. Wood
Nature of Suit: General
Cause of Action: 28 U.S.C. ยง 2241
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
September 24, 2015 Opinion or Order Filing 12 ORDER ADOPTING the Magistrate Judge's 11 Report and Recommendations. Moultry's Petition for writ of Habeas Corpus, filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241 is DISMISSED. The Clerk of Court is DIRECTED to enter the appropriate judgment of dismissal and to CLOSE this case. Signed by Chief Judge Lisa G. Wood on 9/23/2015. (csr)
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 Southern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Moultry v. Hastings
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Petitioner: Adrian Moultry
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: Suzanne Hastings
Represented By: R. Brian Tanner
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?