Jackson v. Shartle
Petitioner: Andrew Charles Jackson
Respondent: JT Shartle
Case Number: 4:2015cv00579
Filed: December 14, 2015
Court: US District Court for the District of Arizona
Office: Tucson Division Office
County: Pima
Presiding Judge: D Thomas Ferraro (PS)
Presiding Judge: Raner C Collins
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
October 3, 2017 Opinion or Order Filing 17 ORDER that Magistrate Judge Ferraro's Report and Recommendation (Doc. 16 ) is ACCEPTED and ADOPTED as the findings of fact and conclusions of law by this Court; DISMISSING the Petition (Doc. 1 ). Signed by Chief Judge Raner C Collins on 10/3/2017. (SIB)
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: Jackson v. Shartle
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Petitioner: Andrew Charles Jackson
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: JT Shartle
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?