Riley v. Epps
Plaintiff: Roy Roderick Riley, Jr.
Defendant: Christopher Epps
Case Number: 2:2009cv00137
Filed: July 30, 2009
Court: US District Court for the Southern District of Mississippi
Office: Hattiesburg Office
County: Forrest
Presiding Judge: Michael T. Parker
Presiding Judge: Keith Starrett
Nature of Suit: None
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 13, 2012 Opinion or Order Filing 19 ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS Dismissing Complaint With Prejudice. A separate Judgment shall be entered. Signed by District Judge Keith Starrett on June 13, 2012 (dsl)
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 Mississippi Southern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Riley v. Epps
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Roy Roderick Riley, Jr.
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 ]
Defendant: Christopher Epps
Represented By: Jim Hood
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?