Adam Pelletier v. Harold Clarke
Petitioner - Appellant: ADAM PELLETIER
Respondent - Appellee: HAROLD CLARKE
Case Number: 17-6742
Filed: June 12, 2017
Court: U.S. Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit
Nature of Suit: Habeas Corpus

Opinions

We have the following opinions for this case:

Date Filed Description
October 26, 2017 Adam Pelletier v. Harold Clarke

Available Case Documents

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

Date Filed Document Text
October 26, 2017 Opinion or Order Filing 406739511 UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--denying Motion to proceed in forma pauperis (FRAP 24) [1000119499-2] Originating case number: 7:16-cv-00322-MFU-RSB Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [1000180913]. Mailed to: Adam Pelletier. [17-6742]
Access additional case information on PACER

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

Search for this case: Adam Pelletier v. Harold Clarke
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Petitioner - appellant: ADAM PELLETIER
Represented By: Adam Pelletier
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 [ Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Respondent - appellee: HAROLD CLARKE
Represented By: Michael Thomas Judge
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 [ 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?