Holt v. Edenfield
Petitioner: David Lawrence Holt
Respondent: K. Edenfield
Case Number: 6:2013cv00245
Filed: December 9, 2013
Court: US District Court for the Eastern District of Kentucky
Office: London Office
County: Clay
Presiding Judge: PSO
Presiding Judge: Danny C. Reeves
Nature of Suit: General
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
April 23, 2014 Opinion or Order Filing 9 MEMORANDUM OPINION & ORDER: 1. Petitioner David L. Holts 28 U.S.C. § 2241 petition for a writ of habeas corpus 1 is DENIED. 2. This action is DISMISSED and STRICKEN from the Courts docket. 3. Judgment shall be entered contemporaneously with this Memorandum Opinion and Order in favor of the named Respondent.. Signed by Judge Danny C. Reeves on 4/23/2014.(JMB)cc: COR,David Holt via US Mail
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: Holt v. Edenfield
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Petitioner: David Lawrence Holt
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: 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 [ 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?