Scott Oberst v. Amy Ardikovic
Petitioner - Appellant: SCOTT E. OBERST
Respondent - Appellee: AMY ARDIKOVIC, Agent, Wisconsin Department of Corrections
Case Number: 16-3734
Filed: October 21, 2016
Court: U.S. Court of Appeals, Seventh Circuit
Nature of Suit: Habeas Corpus

Opinions

We have the following opinions for this case:

Date Filed Description
June 21, 2017 Scott Oberst v. Amy Ardikovic

Available Case Documents

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

Date Filed Document Text
June 21, 2017 Opinion or Order Filing 703018512 Filed Nonprecedential Disposition PER CURIAM. AFFIRMED. Diane P. Wood, Chief Judge; Ilana Diamond Rovner, Circuit Judge and Ann Claire Williams, Circuit Judge. [6849398-1] [6849398] [16-3734]
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: Scott Oberst v. Amy Ardikovic
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Petitioner - appellant: SCOTT E. OBERST
Represented By: Terry William Rose
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: AMY ARDIKOVIC, Agent, Wisconsin Department of Corrections
Represented By: Daniel J. O'Brien
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?