Thomas v. LeSatz
Petitioner: Rufus Rudie Thomas
Respondent: Daniel LeSatz
Case Number: 2:2022cv11587
Filed: July 8, 2022
Court: US District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan
Presiding Judge: David R. Grand
Referring Judge: Denise Page Hood
Nature of Suit: Habeas Corpus (General)
Jury Demanded By: None
Docket Report

This docket was last retrieved on August 9, 2022. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.

Date Filed Document Text
August 9, 2022 Filing 3 Notice Regarding Parties' Responsibility to Notify Court of Address Changes (KCas)
July 19, 2022 Filing 2 Prisoner Trust Fund Account Statement by Rufus Rudie Thomas (DPer)
July 8, 2022 Filing 1 PETITION for Writ of Habeas Corpus filed by Rufus Rudie Thomas against Daniel LeSatz. (Attachments: #1 Document Continuation, #2 Document Continuation, #3 Civil cover sheet) (TTho)

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: Thomas v. LeSatz
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Petitioner: Rufus Rudie Thomas
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: Daniel LeSatz
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?