Buford v. Balcarcel
| Trinity F. Buford |
| Mark McCullick and Erick Balcarcel |
| 2:2018cv12198 |
| July 13, 2018 |
| US District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan |
| Detroit Office |
| Gratiot |
| Stephanie Dawkins Davis |
| Mark A Goldsmith |
| Habeas Corpus (General) |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on May 28, 2019. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 7 ATTORNEY APPEARANCE: John S. Pallas appearing on behalf of Erick Balcarcel w/Certificate of Service (Pallas, John) |
Filing 6
ORDER Requiring Response to #1 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus. Response due by 1/23/2019 Signed by Magistrate Judge R. Steven Whalen. (BGar)
|
|
Filing 5
ORDER granting #2 Application to Proceed Without Prepaying Fees or Costs. Signed by Magistrate Judge R. Steven Whalen. (BGar)
|
|
Filing 4
Order Amending Case Caption. Signed by Magistrate Judge R. Steven Whalen. (BGar)
|
| Filing 3 Notice Regarding Parties' Responsibility to Notify Court of Address Changes (KCas) |
| TEXT-ONLY CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE re #6 Order Requiring Responsive Pleading, #1 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus on Erick Balcarcel and Michigan Attorney General. (BGar) |
| Filing 2 APPLICATION (MOTION) to Proceed without prepaying fees or costs by Trinity F. Buford. (DAll) |
| Filing 1 PETITION for Writ of Habeas Corpus filed by Trinity F. Buford against Mark McCullick. (DAll) |
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 Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
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.
