Foushi v. Apker

Petitioner: George W Foushi, II
Respondent: Lionel Craig Apker, Jr
Case Number: 4:2010cv00489
Filed: August 9, 2010
Court: Arizona District Court
Office: Tucson Division Office
County: Pima
Presiding Judge: Raner C Collins
Referring Judge: Charles R Pyle
Nature of Suit: General
Cause of Action: 28:2241
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
June 15, 2011 19 Opinion or Order of the Court IT IS ORDERED ADOPTING the Report and Recommendation (Doc.17), GRANTING Petitioners Motion to Withdraw (Doc. 16) and Petitioners Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus pursuant to Title 28 U.S.C. 2241 (Doc. 1). is DISMISSED with prejudice. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that judgment shall enter and the Clerk shall close this case. Signed by Judge Raner C Collins on 6/14/11.(KAD)

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

Search for this case: Foushi v. Apker
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Petitioner: George W Foushi, II
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: Lionel Craig Apker, Jr
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.


Why Is My Information Online?