Stojkowski v. Fisher
Petitioner: Krzysztof Stojkowski
Respondent: Scott Peter Fisher
Case Number: 0:2010cv02390
Filed: June 16, 2010
Court: US District Court for the District of Minnesota
Office: DMN Office
County: Pine
Presiding Judge: Raymond L. Erickson
Presiding Judge: Patrick J. Schiltz
Nature of Suit: Habeas Corpus (General)
Cause of Action: 28 U.S.C. ยง 2241
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
May 12, 2011 Opinion or Order Filing 18 ORDER ADOPTING 17 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION: 1. Petitioner's habeas corpus petition [Docket No. 1] is DENIED; and 2. This action is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. (Written Opinion) Signed by Judge Patrick J. Schiltz on 5/12/11. (LPH)
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 Minnesota District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Stojkowski v. Fisher
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Petitioner: Krzysztof Stojkowski
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: Scott Peter Fisher
Represented By: Gregory G Brooker
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?