Woltz v. USA
| Howell Way Woltz |
| USA |
| 3:2008cv00488 |
| October 28, 2008 |
| US District Court for the Western District of North Carolina |
| Habeas Corpus (General) Office |
| Mecklenburg |
| W. Earl Britt |
| None |
| Federal Question |
| 28:2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Federal) |
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing
5
CLERK'S JUDGMENT pursuant to 12/3/08 Order of court (bsw)
|
|
Filing
2
ORDER directing Petitioner to respond to this order re: construing 2241 filing as a 2255 motion ( Responses due by 11/25/2008). Signed by Senior Judge W. Earl Britt on 11/13/2008. (bsw)
|
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
| Search for this case: Woltz v. USA | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Petitioner: Howell Way Woltz | |
| 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: USA | |
| 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.
