Bells v. Holland

Bells v. Holland

Plaintiff:	Charlie Bells, Jr.
Defendant:	James C. Holland
Case Number:	6:2016cv00009
Filed:	January 13, 2016
Court:	US District Court for the Eastern District of Kentucky
Office:	London Office
County:	McCreary
Presiding Judge:	David L. Bunning
Presiding Judge:	P SO
Nature of Suit:	Prison Condition
Cause of Action:	28 U.S.C. § 1331
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
May 23, 2016	Filing 6 MEMORANDUM OPINION & ORDER: (1) The Clerk of the Court shall RE-CLASSIFY this proceeding, on the CM/ECF cover sheet, as petition for writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2241; shall IDENTIFY Petitioner Charlie Bells, Jr., as the "Pet itioner" to this proceeding; shall IDENTIFY James C. Holland as the "Respondent" to this proceeding; and shall AMEND the docket sheet to identify the initiating document filed by Petitioner Charlie Bells, Jr., (Doc. # 1 ) as a petitio n for writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2241, instead of a 28 U.S.C. § 1331 civil rights complaint. (2) The motion to proceed in forma pauperis (Doc. # 2 ) filed by Petitioner Charlie Bells, Jr., is GRANTED, and the $5.00 fili ng fee is WAIVED. (3) The 28 U.S.C. § 2241 petition for writ of habeas corpus (Doc. # 1 ) filed by Petitioner Charlie Bells, Jr., is DENIED. (4) The Court will enter a Judgment in favor of the Respondent. (5) This habeas proceeding is DISMISSED and STRICKEN from the Court's docket. Signed by Judge David L. Bunning on 5/23/2016.(RBB)cc: COR, Paper copy to Charlie Bells, Jr., via US Mail.

Date Filed

Document Text

May 23, 2016

Filing 6 MEMORANDUM OPINION & ORDER: (1) The Clerk of the Court shall RE-CLASSIFY this proceeding, on the CM/ECF cover sheet, as petition for writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2241; shall IDENTIFY Petitioner Charlie Bells, Jr., as the "Pet itioner" to this proceeding; shall IDENTIFY James C. Holland as the "Respondent" to this proceeding; and shall AMEND the docket sheet to identify the initiating document filed by Petitioner Charlie Bells, Jr., (Doc. # 1 ) as a petitio n for writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2241, instead of a 28 U.S.C. § 1331 civil rights complaint. (2) The motion to proceed in forma pauperis (Doc. # 2 ) filed by Petitioner Charlie Bells, Jr., is GRANTED, and the $5.00 fili ng fee is WAIVED. (3) The 28 U.S.C. § 2241 petition for writ of habeas corpus (Doc. # 1 ) filed by Petitioner Charlie Bells, Jr., is DENIED. (4) The Court will enter a Judgment in favor of the Respondent. (5) This habeas proceeding is DISMISSED and STRICKEN from the Court's docket. Signed by Judge David L. Bunning on 5/23/2016.(RBB)cc: COR, Paper copy to Charlie Bells, Jr., 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: Bells v. Holland
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]
Plaintiff: Charlie Bells, Jr.
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 ]
Defendant: James C. Holland
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?