Nowell v. Quintana
Petitioner: Frederick Bradley Nowell, Sr.
Respondent: Francisco Quintana
Case Number: 5:2013cv00064
Filed: March 11, 2013
Court: US District Court for the Eastern District of Kentucky
Office: Lexington Office
County: Fayette
Presiding Judge: PSO
Presiding Judge: Karl S. Forester
Nature of Suit: Habeas Corpus (General)
Cause of Action: 28 U.S.C. ยง 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
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 19, 2013 Opinion or Order Filing 4 MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER: IT IS ORDERED (1) Nowell's 1 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus is DENIED; (2) Court will enter appropriate judgment; (3) matter is STRICKEN from active docket. Signed by Judge Karl S. Forester on 03/19/2013.(DAK)cc: Pro Se Pet(via US Mail)
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 Kentucky Eastern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Nowell v. Quintana
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Petitioner: Frederick Bradley Nowell, Sr.
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: Francisco Quintana
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?