James v. Davis

Defendant: John L. Davis
Petitioner: Marshall Dylan James
Case Number: 1:2013cv02616
Filed: September 24, 2013
Court: Colorado District Court
Office: Denver Office
County: Chaffee
Presiding Judge: Boyd N. Boland
Nature of Suit: General
Cause of Action: 28:2254
Jury Demanded By: None

Available Case Documents

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

Date Filed#Document Text
December 23, 2013 15 Opinion or Order of the Court ORDER dismissing this action, and denying without prejudice leave to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal, by Judge Lewis T. Babcock on 12/23/13. No certificate of appealability will issue. (dkals, )
September 27, 2013 8 Opinion or Order of the Court ORDER To File Pre-Answer Response, by Magistrate Judge Boyd N. Boland on 09/27/13. (nmmsl, )

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 Colorado District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: James v. Davis
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: John L. Davis
Represented By: John D. Seidel
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 [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Petitioner: Marshall Dylan James
Represented By: Jonathan S. Willett
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 [ 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?