Langford #156621 v. Klee
Petitioner: Robert Langford #156621
Respondent: Kent County Circuit Court
Case Number: 1:2012cv00311
Filed: March 29, 2012
Court: US District Court for the Western District of Michigan
Office: Southern Division (1) Office
County: Montcalm
Presiding Judge: Gordon J. Quist
Presiding Judge: Hugh W. Brenneman
Nature of Suit: Habeas Corpus (General)
Cause of Action: 28 U.S.C. ยง 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
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
June 26, 2015 Opinion or Order Filing 55 ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION 53 re 22 : Petitioner's Amended Petition 22 is DENIED and Petitioner's Objection 54 is OVERRULED; case closed; signed by Judge Gordon J. Quist (Judge Gordon J. Quist, jmt)
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 Western District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Langford #156621 v. Klee
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Petitioner: Robert Langford #156621
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: Kent County Circuit Court
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?