McCarthy v. Ebbert
Petitioner: John J. McCarthy
Respondent: Ebbert
Case Number: 3:2015cv00268
Filed: February 23, 2015
Court: US District Court for the District of Connecticut
Office: New Haven Office
County: XX US, Outside State
Presiding Judge: Alfred V. Covello
Nature of Suit: Motions to Vacate Sentence
Cause of Action: 28 U.S.C. ยง 2255
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
February 23, 2015 Opinion or Order Filing 7 ORDER: 1. The MJ's r and r 3 is adopted. 2. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1404, this matter is hereby transferred to the District of Connecticut for consideration as a petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2255Signed by Honorable William W. Caldwell on 02/23/15. (ma)
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 Connecticut District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: McCarthy v. Ebbert
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Petitioner: John J. McCarthy
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: Ebbert
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?