Mary Lynn Cortel Madrono v. Michael Benov
Petitioner: Mary Lynn Cortel Madrono
Respondent: Michael Benov
Case Number: 2:2012cv06288
Filed: July 20, 2012
Court: US District Court for the Central District of California
Presiding Judge: Cormac J. Carney
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
October 23, 2012 Opinion or Order Filing 18 ORDER DENYING PETITION FOR WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS by Judge Cormac J. Carney, (See document for details.) Accordingly, Ms. Madrono is charged with extraditable offenses. Case Terminated. Made JS-6. (rla)
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: Mary Lynn Cortel Madrono v. Michael Benov
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Respondent: Michael Benov
Represented By: Dorothy Kim
Represented By: Assistant US Attorney LA-CV
Represented By: Ryan White
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: Mary Lynn Cortel Madrono
Represented By: Richard D Goldman
Represented By: Sean K Kennedy
Represented By: Jeffrey J Rosanswank
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?