Holmes v. Flournoy

Holmes v. Flournoy

Petitioner:	James Coury Holmes
Respondent:	John V. Flournoy
Case Number:	2:2015cv00112
Filed:	August 6, 2015
Court:	US District Court for the Southern District of Georgia
Office:	Brunswick Office
County:	Wayne
Presiding Judge:	R. Stan Baker
Presiding Judge:	Lisa G. Wood
Nature of Suit:	General
Cause of Action:	28 U.S.C. § 2241
Jury Demanded By:	None

Follow case documents by RSS

Available Case Documents

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

Date Filed	Document Text
August 28, 2017	Filing 28 ORDER ADOPTING 26 Report and Recommendations of the Magistrate Judge as the opinion of the Court. The Court DIMISSES in part and DENIES in part Holmes' Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus, filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241. The Court DIRECTS the Clerk to enter the appropriate judgment of dismissal and to CLOSE this case. Signed by Judge Lisa G. Wood on 8/28/2017. (ca)
August 8, 2017	Filing 26 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS of the Magistrate Judge that the Court DISMISS in part and DENY in part Holmes' 1 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus, filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241, and DIRECT the Clerk to CLOSE this case. It is further R ECOMMENDED that the Court DENY Holmes leave to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal. The Court ORDERS any party seeking to object to this Report and Recommendation to file specific written objections within fourteen (14) days of the date on which this Report and Recommendation is entered (Objections to R&R due by 8/22/2017). ORDER directing service of the REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION of the Magistrate Judge. Signed by Magistrate Judge R. Stan Baker on 8/8/2017. (ca)

Date Filed

Document Text

August 28, 2017

Filing 28 ORDER ADOPTING 26 Report and Recommendations of the Magistrate Judge as the opinion of the Court. The Court DIMISSES in part and DENIES in part Holmes' Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus, filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241. The Court DIRECTS the Clerk to enter the appropriate judgment of dismissal and to CLOSE this case. Signed by Judge Lisa G. Wood on 8/28/2017. (ca)

August 8, 2017

Filing 26 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS of the Magistrate Judge that the Court DISMISS in part and DENY in part Holmes' 1 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus, filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241, and DIRECT the Clerk to CLOSE this case. It is further R ECOMMENDED that the Court DENY Holmes leave to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal. The Court ORDERS any party seeking to object to this Report and Recommendation to file specific written objections within fourteen (14) days of the date on which this Report and Recommendation is entered (Objections to R&R due by 8/22/2017). ORDER directing service of the REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION of the Magistrate Judge. Signed by Magistrate Judge R. Stan Baker on 8/8/2017. (ca)

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

Search for this case: Holmes v. Flournoy
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]
Petitioner: James Coury Holmes
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: John V. Flournoy
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?