Bell v. Sheldon
Petitioner: Michael C. Bell, Jr.
Respondent: Ed Sheldon
Case Number: 1:2009cv01884
Filed: August 11, 2009
Court: US District Court for the Northern District of Ohio
Office: Cleveland Office
County: Cuyahoga
Presiding Judge: William H. Baughman
Presiding Judge: Jack Zouhary
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
December 21, 2010 Opinion or Order Filing 14 Memorandum Opinion and Order Adopting Report and Recommendation. Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus is dismissed. Furthermore, under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1915(a) and 2253(c), this Court certifies that an appeal of this action could not be taken in good faith. Judge Jack Zouhary on 12/21/2010. (C,D)
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 Ohio Northern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Bell v. Sheldon
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Petitioner: Michael C. Bell, 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 ]
Respondent: Ed Sheldon
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?