Martin v. Berghuis
Petitioner: Marco Martin
Respondent: Mary Berghuis
Case Number: 2:2015cv11207
Filed: March 30, 2015
Court: US District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan
Office: Detroit Office
County: Muskegon
Presiding Judge: Gerald E. Rosen
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
April 15, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 22 ORDER denying 20 Motion for Certificate of Appealability. Signed by District Judge Terrence G. Berg. (AChu)
November 16, 2021 Opinion or Order Filing 17 OPINION and ORDER Denying the Amended Habeas Corpus Petition, Declining to Issue a Certificate of Appealability, and Granting Leave to Appeal In Forma Pauperis. Signed by District Judge Arthur J. Tarnow. (McColley, N)
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: Martin v. Berghuis
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Petitioner: Marco Martin
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: Mary Berghuis
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?