Elbert Smith v. Harold W. Clarke
ELBERT SMITH |
HAROLD W. CLARKE, Director of the Virginia Department of Corrections |
14-6973 |
June 30, 2014 |
U.S. Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit |
Habeas Corpus |
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
Document Text |
---|
Filing 405200511 UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--denying Motion to proceed in forma pauperis (FRAP 24) [999411175-2], denying Motion to proceed in forma pauperis (FRAP 24) [999407634-2]; denying Motion to compel [999407637-2] Originating case number: 2:13-cv-00611-RGD-LRL Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999462075]. Mailed to: Smith. [14-6973] |
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: Elbert Smith v. Harold W. Clarke | |
---|---|
Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
Petitioner - appellant: ELBERT SMITH | |
Represented By: | Elbert Smith |
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 - appellee: HAROLD W. CLARKE, Director of the Virginia Department of Corrections | |
Represented By: | James Milburn Isaacs |
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.