Bell v. Warden
Petitioner: Jerome Bell
Respondent: FCI Gilmer Warden
Case Number: 5:2020cv00083
Filed: April 28, 2020
Court: US District Court for the Northern District of West Virginia
Presiding Judge: John Preston Bailey
Referring Judge: James P Mazzone
Nature of Suit: Habeas Corpus (General)
Cause of Action: 28:2241
Jury Demanded By: None
Docket Report

This docket was last retrieved on April 28, 2020. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.

Date Filed Document Text
April 28, 2020 Filing 2 NOTICE OF DEFICIENT PLEADING AND INTENT TO DISMISS re #1 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Attachments: #1 2241 Packet)(copy to pro se Petitioner via CM/rrr)(ag)
April 28, 2020 Filing 1 PETITION for Writ of Habeas Corpus against FCI Gilmer Warden filed by Jerome Bell. (Attachments: #1 Envelope)(ag)

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 West Virginia Northern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Bell v. Warden
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Respondent: FCI Gilmer Warden
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: Jerome Bell
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?