Jones v. Wilson
Petitioner: Philip Jones
Respondent: Denese Wilson
Case Number: 0:2014cv03246
Filed: August 22, 2014
Court: US District Court for the District of Minnesota
Office: DMN Office
County: Pine
Presiding Judge: Franklin L. Noel
Presiding Judge: Patrick J. Schiltz
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
August 7, 2015 Opinion or Order Filing 18 ORDER adopting Report and Recommendation 17 denying 9 Motion for Summary Judgment. (Written Opinion) Signed by Judge Patrick J. Schiltz on August 7, 2015. (CLG) cc: Philip Jones. Modified on 8/7/2015 (las).
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: Jones v. Wilson
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Petitioner: Philip Jones
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: Denese Wilson
Represented By: Ana H Voss
Represented By: D Gerald Wilhelm
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?