Fudge v. Wilson
Petitioner: Melvin Fudge
Respondent: Eric Wilson
Case Number: 6:2011cv00004
Filed: January 5, 2011
Court: US District Court for the Eastern District of Kentucky
Office: London Office
County: McCreary
Presiding Judge: PSO
Presiding Judge: Gregory F. VanTatenhove
Nature of Suit: Prison Condition
Cause of Action: 28 U.S.C. ยง 2241
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
June 13, 2011 Opinion or Order Filing 3 MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER: 1) Melvin Fudges Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus [R. 2] is DENIED; 2) This action is DISMISSED, sua sponte, with prejudice; 3) Judgment will be entered contemporaneously. Signed by Gregory F. VanTatenhove on 6/13/2011.(RC)cc: COR, paper copy pro se petitioner
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 Kentucky Eastern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Fudge v. Wilson
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Petitioner: Melvin Fudge
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: Eric Wilson
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?