Pruitt v. United States of America, The
Petitioner: Arthur Sidney Pruitt
Respondent: United States of America, The
Case Number: 7:2011cv08030
Filed: July 12, 2011
Court: US District Court for the Northern District of Alabama
Office: Western Office
County: XX US, Outside State
Presiding Judge: Robert R Armstrong
Presiding Judge: Abdul K Kallon
Nature of Suit: Motions to Vacate Sentence
Cause of Action: 28 U.S.C. ยง 2255
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 31, 2012 Opinion or Order Filing 18 MEMORANDUM OPINION. Signed by Judge Abdul K Kallon on 08/31/12. (CVA)
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 Alabama Northern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Pruitt v. United States of America, The
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Respondent: United States of America, The
Represented By: John B Felton
Represented By: Joyce White Vance, US Attorney
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 ]
Petitioner: Arthur Sidney Pruitt
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?