Bradley v. United States of America

Respondent: United States of America
Petitioner: Kenton Bradley
Case Number: 0:2013cv00824
Filed: April 5, 2013
Court: Minnesota District Court
County: St. Louis
Referring Judge: Tony N. Leung
Presiding Judge: Paul A. Magnuson
Nature of Suit: Habeas Corpus (General)

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:

Date Filed#Document Text
June 24, 2013 5 Opinion or Order of the Court Order Adopting the Report and Recommendation of Magistrate Judge 4 ; Denying Petitioner's application for habeas corpus relief under 28 U.S.C. Section 2241 1 ; Denying Petitioner's application to proceed in forma pauperis 2 ; and summarily dismissing this action for lack of jurisdiction. LET JUDGMENT BE ENTERED ACCORDINGLY. Signed by The Hon. Paul A. Magnuson on 06/24/2013. (LLM)

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

Search for this case: Bradley v. United States of America
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Respondent: United States of America
Represented By: Erika R Mozangue
Represented By: Gregory G Brooker
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 ]
Petitioner: Kenton Bradley
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 should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.