HAMLILY et al v. BUSH et al
| 1:2005cv00763 |
| April 15, 2005 |
| US District Court for the District of Columbia |
| Washington, DC Office |
| John D. Bates |
| Habeas Corpus (General) |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa |
| None |
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing
216
MEMORANDUM OPINION regarding the scope of the government's detention authority. Signed by Judge John D. Bates on 5/19/2009. (lcjdb2)
|
|
Filing
180
ORDER requiring petitioners' response to respondents' memorandum regarding the scope of the government's detention authority by March 27, 2009 and setting a joint hearing on the issue for April 8, 2009 at 2:00 p.m. See order for details. Signed by Judge John D. Bates on 3/16/2009. (lcjdb2)
|
|
Filing
154
ORDER requiring any refinement of respondents' position on the appropriate definition of "enemy combatant" by not later than March 13, 2009. See Order for details. Signed by Judge John D. Bates on 2/11/2009. (lcjdb2)
|
|
Filing
140
ORDER inviting respondents to submit further briefing regarding definition of "enemy combatant." See Order for details. Signed by Judge John D. Bates on 1/22/2009. (lcjdb2)
|
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 District Of Columbia District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
| Search for this case: HAMLILY et al v. BUSH et al | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | 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.
