FOOKS v. LUTHER et al
Petitioner: KHAMAL FOOKS
Respondent: DISTRICT ATTORNEY OF ALLEGHENY COUNTY, J. LUTHER and ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA
Case Number: 2:2019cv01105
Filed: August 26, 2019
Court: US District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania
Presiding Judge: Lisa Pupo Lenihan
Nature of Suit: Habeas Corpus (General)
Cause of Action: 28 U.S.C. ยง 2254
Jury Demanded By: None
Docket Report

This docket was last retrieved on May 13, 2021. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.

Date Filed Document Text
October 15, 2019 Opinion or Order Filing 7 ORDER DENYING the #5 Motion to Appoint Counsel. Signed by Magistrate Judge Lisa Pupo Lenihan on 10/15/2019. (jmb)
October 11, 2019 Filing 6 BRIEF in Support re #5 Motion to Appoint Counsel filed by KHAMAL FOOKS. (jm)
October 11, 2019 Filing 5 MOTION to Appoint Counsel by KHAMAL FOOKS. (jm)
October 11, 2019 Filing 4 PETITION for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Filing fee $5, receipt number 24668058977), filed by KHAMAL FOOKS. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit 1, #2 Exhibit 2, #3 Exhibit 3, #4 Exhibit 4, #5 Exhibit 5, #6 Exhibit 6, #7 Envelope) (jm)
October 10, 2019 Filing 3 Filing fee of $5 received. Receipt number 24668058977 (jm)
September 30, 2019 Opinion or Order Filing 2 ORDER that the Clerk of Court is to mark this case closed. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Petitioner may reopen the case by paying the $5.00 filing fee or submitting a motion to proceed in forma pauperis and a certified copy of the account statement for the six (6) months preceding the filing of the complaint within 30 days from the date of this order. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the parties are allowed fourteen (14) days from this date to appeal this order to a District Judge pursuant to Rule 72.C.2 of the Local Rules. Failure to appeal within fourteen (14) days will constitute waiver of the right to appeal. Signed by Magistrate Judge Lisa Pupo Lenihan on 09/30/2019. (jmb)
August 26, 2019 Filing 1 Remark: Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus lodged, no fee or IFP motion received. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit 1, #2 Exhibit 2, #3 Exhibit 3, #4 Exhibit 4, #5 Exhibit 5, #6 Exhibit 6, #7 Petition for Appointment of Counsel, #8 Brief in Support of Petition for Appointment of Counsel, #9 Envelope) (nll)

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 Western District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: FOOKS v. LUTHER et al
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Respondent: DISTRICT ATTORNEY OF ALLEGHENY COUNTY
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: J. LUTHER
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: ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA
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: KHAMAL FOOKS
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?