Chestnut v. Fox
Petitioner: Raymond Chestnut
Respondent: John Fox
Case Number: 5:2016cv01367
Filed: November 30, 2016
Court: US District Court for the Western District of Oklahoma
Office: Oklahoma City Office
County: Oklahoma
Presiding Judge: David L. Russell
Nature of Suit: General
Cause of Action: 28 U.S.C. ยง 2254
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
April 5, 2017 Opinion or Order Filing 16 ORDER ADOPTING IN PART and DENIES IN PART REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION for 15 Denies as Moot Motion to Show Cause filed by Raymond Chestnut, 14 Report and Recommendation, Petitioners petition for a writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 [Doc. 1] is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. Signed by Honorable David L. Russell on 4/5/17. (jw)
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 Oklahoma Western District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Chestnut v. Fox
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Petitioner: Raymond Chestnut
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: John Fox
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?