Harpe v. Tatum
Petitioner: Nathaniel A. Harpe
Respondent: Clay Tatum
Case Number: 1:2009cv02611
Filed: September 21, 2009
Court: US District Court for the Northern District of Georgia
Office: Atlanta Office
County: Calhoun
Presiding Judge: Duffey
Presiding Judge: Walker
Nature of Suit: Other
Cause of Action: 28 U.S.C. ยง 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
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
October 29, 2009 Opinion or Order Filing 5 OPINION AND ORDER adopting Magistrate Judge Walker's 3 Final Report and Recommendation; OVERRULING Petitioner's 4 Objections; Further ORDERING that Petitioner's 1 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus is DENIED and the Petition is DISMISSED. Signed by Judge William S. Duffey, Jr on 10/29/2009. (tcc)
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 Georgia Northern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Harpe v. Tatum
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Petitioner: Nathaniel A. Harpe
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: Clay Tatum
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?