Leonard v. Hickey
Case Number: 1:2006cv00734
Filed: September 25, 2006
Court: US District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia
Office: Bluefield Office
Presiding Judge: David A. Faber
Presiding Judge: R. Clarke VanDervort
Nature of Suit: Habeas Corpus (General)
Cause of Action: 28 U.S.C. ยง 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federal)
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
July 1, 2009 Opinion or Order Filing 4 MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER CONFIRMING AND ACCEPTING 3 the PROPOSED FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION of Magistrate Judge R. Clarke VanDervort; DISMISSING 1 Petitioner's 2241 APPLICATION and DIRECTING the Clerk to remove this action from the Court's active docket. Signed by Senior Judge David A. Faber on 7/1/2009. (cc: Petitioner, Pro Se and counsel of record) (arb)
May 22, 2009 Opinion or Order Filing 3 PROPOSED FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION of Magistrate Judge R. Clarke VanDervort RECOMMENDING that the District Court DISMISS 1 Petitioner's Application for Writ of Habeas Corpus (2241) and REMOVE this matter from the Court's docket. This case no longer referred to Magistrate Judge R. Clarke VanDervort. Objections to Proposed F&R due by 6/8/2009. Signed by Magistrate Judge R. Clarke VanDervort on 5/22/2009. (Petitioner, Pro Se) (arb)
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 Southern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Leonard v. Hickey
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | 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?