Connolly v. Roden
Respondent - Appellee: GARY RODEN
Petitioner - Appellant: EVERETT H. CONNOLLY
Case Number: 13-1191
Filed: February 6, 2013
Court: U.S. Court of Appeals, First Circuit
Nature of Suit: General (Habeas Corpus)

Opinions

We have the following opinions for this case:

Date Filed Description
May 21, 2014 Summary Connolly v. Roden

Available Case Documents

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

Date Filed Document Text
May 21, 2014 Opinion or Order Filing 106691104 OPINION issued by Sandra L. Lynch, Chief Appellate Judge; Rogeriee Thompson, Appellate Judge and William E. Smith*, U.S. District Judge. Published. * Of the District of Rhode Island, sitting by designation. [13-1191]
Access additional case information on PACER

Access the Case Summary and Docket Report to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.

Search for this case: Connolly v. Roden
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Respondent - appellee: GARY RODEN
Represented By: Eva Marie Badway
Represented By: Natassia M. Kelly
Represented By: Natalie S. Monroe
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 - appellant: EVERETT H. CONNOLLY
Represented By: Everett H. Connolly
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?