Marshall v. Stephens Director TDCJ-CID
Petitioner: Michael Marshall
Respondent: William Stephens Director TDCJ-CID
Case Number: 3:2014cv04258
Filed: December 3, 2014
Court: US District Court for the Northern District of Texas
Office: Dallas Office
County: Dallas
Presiding Judge: Sidney A Fitzwater
Presiding Judge: Irma Carrillo Ramirez
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
January 6, 2017 Opinion or Order Filing 19 ORDER: The findings, conclusions, and recommendation of the magistrate judge are adopted. The court denies a certificate of appealability. (Ordered by Judge Sidney A Fitzwater on 1/6/2017) (sss)
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 Northern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Marshall v. Stephens Director TDCJ-CID
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Respondent: William Stephens Director TDCJ-CID
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: Michael Marshall
Represented By: Brett Evan Ordiway
Represented By: Robert N Udashen
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?