Hogan v. Watson
Petitioner: Rodney M. Hogan
Respondent: T.J. Watson
Case Number: 0:2016cv03044
Filed: September 12, 2016
Court: US District Court for the District of Minnesota
Office: DMN Office
County: Pine
Presiding Judge: Leo I. Brisbois
Presiding Judge: Susan Richard Nelson
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
July 10, 2017 Opinion or Order Filing 19 ORDER adopting 18 Report and Recommendation. The Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus is denied as moot; this action is dismissed with prejudice. (Written Opinion) Signed by Judge Susan Richard Nelson on 07/10/2017. (SMD) cc: Rodney M. Hogan. Modified on 7/10/2017 (lmb).
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: Hogan v. Watson
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Petitioner: Rodney M. Hogan
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: T.J. Watson
Represented By: David W Fuller
Represented By: Ana H Voss
Represented By: D Gerald Wilhelm
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?