Whitright v. Fisher
Petitioner: Boyd Whitright
Respondent: Scott P. Fisher
Case Number: 0:2011cv02557
Filed: September 6, 2011
Court: US District Court for the District of Minnesota
Office: DMN Office
County: Pine
Presiding Judge: Jeanne J. Graham
Presiding Judge: Paul A. Magnuson
Nature of Suit: 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
October 17, 2011 Opinion or Order Filing 3 Order Adopting the Report and Recommendation of Magistrate Judge Graham 2 ; Denying the Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus 1 ; and Dismissing the Matter With Prejudice. LET JUDGMENT BE ENTERED ACCORDINGLY. (Written Opinion). Signed by The Honorable Judge Paul A. Magnuson on 10/14/2011. (LM)
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: Whitright 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: Boyd Whitright
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 P. Fisher
Represented By: Erika R Mozangue
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?