Haddix v. Meko
Petitioner: Blake Haddix
Respondent: Joseph Meko
Case Number: 5:2015cv00031
Filed: February 10, 2015
Court: US District Court for the Eastern District of Kentucky
Office: Lexington Office
County: Breathitt
Presiding Judge: Danny C. Reeves
Presiding Judge: Candace J. Smith
Nature of Suit: General
Cause of Action: 28 U.S.C. ยง 2254
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
December 4, 2015 Opinion or Order Filing 14 MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER: 1) 10 Recommended Disposition is ADOPTED IN FULL and INCORPORATED by reference. 2) 13 Objections are OVERRULED. 3) 1 Petition is DENIED and matter is DISMISSED. 4) Judgment shall be entered. 5) Certificate of Appealability shall not issue w respect to any issue. Signed by Judge Danny C. Reeves on 12/4/2015. (SCD)cc: COR,Pro Se Petitioner(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: Haddix v. Meko
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Petitioner: Blake Haddix
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: Joseph Meko
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?