Warren v. United States of America

Plaintiff: Terry R. Warren
Defendant: United States of America
Case Number: 2:2010cv01115
Filed: September 15, 2010
Court: West Virginia Southern District Court
Office: Charleston Office
County: Kanawha
Nature of Suit: Other
Cause of Action: 77:7777
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
February 3, 2011 53 Opinion or Order of the Court MEORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER; adopting 52 Proposed Findings and Recommendations by Magistrate Judge; denying 39 Motion to Vacate, Set Aside or Correct Sentence (2255), filed by Terry R. Warren; directing that this action is dismissed and stricken from the docket. Signed by Judge John T. Copenhaver, Jr. on 2/3/2011. (cc: attys; counsel of record, magistrate judge) (tmr)

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 West Virginia Southern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Warren 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 ]
Plaintiff: Terry R. Warren
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 ]
Defendant: United States of America
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.