Rodriguez v. Edenfield

Respondent: K. Edenfield
Petitioner: Emmanuel Rodriguez
Case Number: 6:2013cv00048
Filed: March 7, 2013
Court: Kentucky Eastern District Court
Office: London Office
County: Clay
Referring Judge: PSO
Presiding Judge: Danny C. Reeves
Nature of Suit: Prisoner Petitions (Prison Condition)
Cause of Action: 28:2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
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 23, 2013 9 Opinion or Order of the Court MEMORANDUM OPINION & ORDER: 1. Emmanuel Rodriguez's petition for a writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S. C. §2241 [Record No. 1 ] is DENIED. 2. This matter is DISMISSED and STRICKEN from the Court's docket. 3. Judgment shall be entered this date in favor of the Respondent. Signed by Judge Danny C. Reeves on 10/23/2013.(KJA)cc: COR, mailed paper copy to pro se filer

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: Rodriguez v. Edenfield
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Respondent: K. Edenfield
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 [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Petitioner: Emmanuel Rodriguez
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 [ 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?