Morris v. Conway

Petitioner: Robert Morris
Respondent: Jack Conway
Case Number: 3:2011cv00211
Filed: April 7, 2011
Court: Kentucky Western District Court
Office: Louisville Office
County: Oldham
Presiding Judge: Thomas B. Russell
Nature of Suit: Death Penalty
Cause of Action: 28:2254
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
September 15, 2011 3 Opinion or Order of the Court OPINION & ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE by Chief Judge Thomas B. Russell on 9/14/2011 Show Cause Response due by 10/17/2011.cc:counsel (KJA) Modified on 9/15/2011 to edit docket text and document type (KJA).
December 19, 2011 5 Opinion or Order of the Court MEMORANDUM AND OPINION by Senior Judge Thomas B. Russell on 12/15/2011: an appropriate order shall entercc:counsel (KJA)

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 Western District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Morris v. Conway
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Petitioner: Robert Morris
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 [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Respondent: Jack Conway
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 [ 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 were retrieved from PACER, and should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.