Renaldo Lamont Johnson v. Bruno Stolc
Petitioner: Renaldo Lamont Johnson
Respondent: Bruno Stolc
Case Number: 2:2012cv02058
Filed: March 12, 2012
Court: US District Court for the Central District of California
Presiding Judge: Paul L. Abrams
Presiding Judge: Gary A. Feess
Nature of Suit: Habeas Corpus (General)

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:

Date Filed Document Text
August 21, 2012 Opinion or Order Filing 16 JUDGMENT by Judge Gary A. Feess. Pursuant to the order 15 adopting the magistrate judge's report and recommendation, IT IS ADJUDGED that the petition in this matter is denied and dismissed with prejudice. (MD JS-6, Case Terminated). (ch)
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 California Central District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Renaldo Lamont Johnson v. Bruno Stolc
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Petitioner: Renaldo Lamont Johnson
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: Bruno Stolc
Represented By: Mary E Sanchez
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?