Maynard v. Wolfenbarger
Petitioner: Michael Maynard
Respondent: Hugh Wolfenbarger
Case Number: 2:2009cv13861
Filed: September 30, 2009
Court: US District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan
Office: Detroit Office
County: Macomb
Presiding Judge: Komives
Presiding Judge: Steeh
Nature of Suit: Other
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
April 21, 2010 Opinion or Order Filing 7 OPINION and ORDER Granting 5 MOTION to Dismiss w/certificate of service by Hugh Wolfenbarger, Dismissing without Prejudice 1 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus, and Declining to Issue and Certificate of Appealability and an Application for Leave to Proceed on Appeal in Forma Pauperis. Signed by District Judge George Caram Steeh. (NHol)
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: Maynard v. Wolfenbarger
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Petitioner: Michael Maynard
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: Hugh Wolfenbarger
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?