Dowling v. Cannon
Petitioner: Charlton Javier Dowling
Respondent: J Al Cannon, Jr
Case Number: 9:2011cv00633
Filed: March 16, 2011
Court: US District Court for the District of South Carolina
Office: Beaufort Office
County: Charleston
Presiding Judge: Richard M Gergel
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
May 23, 2011 Opinion or Order Filing 11 ORDER ADOPTING 9 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS of Magistrate Judge Bristow Marchant, dismissing this petition for a writ of habeas corpus without prejudice and without requiring a response by the Respondent. Signed by Honorable Richard M Gergel on 5/23/11. (rpol, )
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 South Carolina District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Dowling v. Cannon
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Respondent: J Al Cannon, 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 ]
Petitioner: Charlton Javier Dowling
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?