Cook v. Pore
| Rory Cook |
| AK Pore |
| 1:2014cv05830 |
| July 28, 2014 |
| U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois |
| Chicago Office |
| Knox |
| Matthew F. Kennelly |
| General |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 2254 |
| None |
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing
136
MEMORANDUM Opinion and Order: The Court directs the Clerk to enter judgmentdenying Rory Cook's petition for a writ of habeas corpus. The Court declines to issue acertificate of appealability. Civil case terminated. Signed by the Honorable Matthew F. Kennelly on 8/14/2023. Mailed notice. (mma, )
|
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the U.S. Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
Access this case on the Illinois Northern 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: Cook v. Pore | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Petitioner: Rory Cook | |
| 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 | [ Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Respondent: AK Pore | |
| 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 | [ 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.