Palmer v. Donahue
Petitioner: Larry Palmer
Respondent: J. David Donahue
Case Number: 3:2009cv00446
Filed: June 26, 2009
Court: US District Court for the Western District of Kentucky
Office: Louisville Office
County: Meade
Presiding Judge: Charles R. Simpson
Nature of Suit: None
Cause of Action: 28 U.S.C. ยง 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
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
January 27, 2010 Opinion or Order Filing 8 ORDER by Judge Charles R. Simpson, III on 1/26/2010; for the reasons set forth in DN 7 Memorandum Opinion, the instant action is DISMISSED without prejudice. Leave to appeal to the Court of Appeals in forma pauperis is DENIED. This is a final Order.cc:Petitioner, pro se (SC)
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: Palmer v. Donahue
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Petitioner: Larry Palmer
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: J. David Donahue
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?