Savchuk v. Laydum
Petitioner: Alex Savchuk
Respondent: Laydum
Case Number: 2:2008cv14400
Filed: October 16, 2008
Court: US District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan
Office: Detroit Office
County: Wayne
Presiding Judge: Lawson
Presiding Judge: Whalen
Nature of Suit: Habeas Corpus (General)
Cause of Action: No cause code entered
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
May 3, 2010 Opinion or Order Filing 19 JUDGMENT that Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus is Denied. Signed by District Judge David M. Lawson. (BSoc)
May 26, 2009 Opinion or Order Filing 13 ORDER denying 3 Application filed by Alex Savchuk without prejudice and Denying as Moot 7 MOTION to Expedite the Decision Regarding the Application for Appointment of Counsel filed by Alex Savchuk. Signed by District Judge David M. Lawson. (CGre)
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 Michigan Eastern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Savchuk v. Laydum
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Respondent: Laydum
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 ]
Petitioner: Alex Savchuk
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?