Ernest Freeman v. C. Tamkins
Petitioner: Ernest Freeman, III
Respondent: C. Tamkins
Case Number: 2:2013cv04939
Filed: July 10, 2013
Court: US District Court for the Central District of California
Presiding Judge: Jay C. Gandhi
Presiding Judge: Dolly M. Gee
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 13, 2013 Opinion or Order Filing 4 JUDGMENT by Judge Dolly M. Gee, Related to: Order, 3 . IT IS ADJUDGED that the above-captioned action is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE for the reasons set forth in the Order Summarily Dismissing Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus Without Prejudice and Denying Motion for Appointment of Counsel. (MD JS-6, Case Terminated). (bem)
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: Ernest Freeman v. C. Tamkins
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Petitioner: Ernest Freeman, III
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: C. Tamkins
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?