Emanuel Nash v. F. Foulk
Petitioner: Emanuel Nash
Respondent: F. Foulk
Case Number: 2:2014cv05494
Filed: July 15, 2014
Court: US District Court for the Central District of California
Presiding Judge: Suzanne H. Segal
Presiding Judge: James V. Selna
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
December 21, 2015 Opinion or Order Filing 31 JUDGMENT by Judge James V. Selna. Pursuant to the Court's Order Accepting Findings, Conclusions and Recommendations of United States Magistrate Judge, IT IS HEREBY ADJUDGED that the above-captioned action is dismissed with prejudice. Related to: R&R - Accepting Report and Recommendations, 30 (MD JS-6, Case Terminated). (sbou)
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: Emanuel Nash v. F. Foulk
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Respondent: F. Foulk
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 ]
Petitioner: Emanuel Nash
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?