Harbst v. Quarterman
Petitioner: Michael Paul Harbst
Respondent: Nathaniel Quarterman
Case Number: 4:2008cv00573
Filed: July 16, 2009
Court: US District Court for the Northern District of Texas
Office: Fort Worth Office
Presiding Judge: John McBryde
Nature of Suit: Habeas Corpus (General)
Cause of Action: 28 U.S.C. ยง 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:

Date Filed Document Text
July 16, 2009 Opinion or Order Filing 19 ORDER ADOPTING 16 Findings and Recommendations, (Ordered by Judge John McBryde on 7/16/09) (wrb) cy to petitioner
September 22, 2008 Opinion or Order Filing 12 ORDER ADOPTING 10 FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATION OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE. (Signed by Judge Reed C O'Connor on 9/22/2008) (twd)
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: Harbst v. Quarterman
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Petitioner: Michael Paul Harbst
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: Nathaniel Quarterman
Represented By: S Michael Bozarth
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?