Poe v. Prater
Petitioner: Johnny Poe
Respondent: Dennis Prater
Case Number: 1:2007cv00021
Filed: February 2, 2007
Court: US District Court for the Western District of Kentucky
Office: Bowling Green Office
County: Grayson
Presiding Judge: Joseph H. McKinley
Nature of Suit: Mandamus & Other
Cause of Action: 28 U.S.C. ยง 1361 Petition for Writ of Mandamus
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
February 14, 2007 Opinion or Order Filing 3 MEMORANDUM AND OPINION by Judge Joseph H. McKinley Jr. on 2/13/2007; Petitioner's request for mandamus relief will be denied and action dismissed. Clerk of Court directed to send Petitioner a form for filing Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus should Petitioner wish to file a habeas action. cc:Petitioner pro se(LMW)
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 Western District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Poe v. Prater
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Petitioner: Johnny Poe
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: Dennis Prater
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?