Woods v. Palmer
Petitioner: Curtis Lamont Woods
Respondent: Carmen Palmer
Case Number: 2:2015cv10095
Filed: January 7, 2015
Court: US District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan
Office: Detroit Office
County: Ionia
Presiding Judge: Paul D. Borman
Presiding Judge: Michael J. Hluchaniuk
Nature of Suit: General
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 25, 2015 Opinion or Order Filing 8 ORDER Construing 7 Objection filed by Curtis Lamont Woods as Motion for Reconsideration and Denying Motion. Signed by District Judge Paul D. Borman. (DTof)
January 30, 2015 Opinion or Order Filing 5 OPINION and ORDER Dismissing 1 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus and Denying Certificate of Appealability. Signed by District Judge Paul D. Borman. (DTof)
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: Woods v. Palmer
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Petitioner: Curtis Lamont Woods
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: Carmen 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 ]

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?