Darden v. Stephen
Petitioner: Johnathan Darden
Respondent: Williams Stephen
Case Number: 2:2014cv01085
Filed: December 1, 2014
Court: US District Court for the Eastern District of Texas
Office: Marshall Office
County: Anderson
Presiding Judge: Rodney Gilstrap
Presiding Judge: Roy S. Payne
Nature of Suit: Civil Rights
Cause of Action: 28 U.S.C. ยง 1651
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
March 9, 2018 Opinion or Order Filing 24 ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION for 16 Report and Recommendation. It is ORDERED that Petitioners objections are overruled and the Report of the Magistrate Judge is ADOPTED and that that the above-styled petition for the writ of habeas corpus is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. Signed by District Judge Robert W. Schroeder, III on 3/9/2018. (slo, )
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 Texas Eastern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Darden v. Stephen
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Petitioner: Johnathan Darden
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: Williams Stephen
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?