Wolters v. Thomas
Defendant: Warden Thomas
Petitioner: Andrew Wolters
Case Number: 3:2012cv01706
Filed: August 27, 2012
Court: US District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania
Office: Scranton Office
County: Union
Presiding Judge: JV
Presiding Judge: Richard P. Conaboy
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
October 12, 2012 Opinion or Order Filing 5 MEMORANDUM For the reasons discussed above, Petitioners 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition (Doc. 1) is dismissed without prejudice and his Application to proceed in forma pauperis (Doc. 4) is granted for this filing only. (See Memorandum)Signed by Honorable Richard P. Conaboy on 10/12/12. (cc, )
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 Pennsylvania Middle District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Wolters v. Thomas
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Warden Thomas
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 ]
Petitioner: Andrew Wolters
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?