Reed v. Smith

Petitioner: Kenneth O'Keith Reed
Respondent: Aaron Smith
Case Number: 5:2016cv00167
Filed: October 18, 2016
Court: Kentucky Western District Court
Office: Paducah Office
County: Christian
Presiding Judge: Thomas B. Russell
Nature of Suit: General
Cause of Action: 28:2241
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
March 2, 2017 8 Opinion or Order of the Court MEMORANDUM OPIONION AND ORDER by Senior Judge Thomas B. Russell on 3/2/2017: The Court will dismiss this action without prejudice. No certificate of appealability is warranted in this case; The Court DIRECTS the Clerk of Court to send Petitioner two separate § 2254 packets. The Court will enter a dismissal Order consistent with this Memorandum Opinion. cc: Plaintiff (pro se), Respondent, Atty General (JBM)

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: Reed v. Smith
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Petitioner: Kenneth O'Keith Reed
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 ]
Respondent: Aaron Smith
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?