Smith v. Gaither

Smith v. Gaither

Petitioner:	Rodney Eugene Smith
Respondent:	John Gaither
Case Number:	1:2008cv00968
Filed:	August 4, 2008
Court:	US District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia
Office:	Habeas Corpus (General) Office
County:	Monroe
Presiding Judge:	David A. Faber
Presiding Judge:	R. Clarke VanDervort
Nature of Suit:	None
Cause of Action:	U.S. Government Defendant
Jury Demanded By:	28:2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federal)

Follow case documents by RSS

Available Case Documents

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

Date Filed	Document Text
September 2, 2009	Filing 14 MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER ADOPTING 13 the PROPOSED FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION of Magistrate Judge R. Clarke VanDervort; DENYING plaintiff's application to proceed in forma pauperis; DENYING the petition for writ of habeas corpus (2241); DE NYING 8 and 9 plaintiff's motions for summary judgment; DISMISSING this case and DIRECTING the Clerk to remove it from the Court's active docket. Signed by Senior Judge David A. Faber on 9/2/2009. (cc: Plaintiff, Pro Se and counsel of record) (arb)
August 7, 2009	Filing 13 PROPOSED FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION of Magistrate Judge R. Clarke VanDervort RECOMMENDING that the District Court DENY 4 Petitioner's Application to Proceed in forma pauperis, Petitioner's 8 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus by a Pers on in Federal Custody, 9 MOTIONS by Rodney Eugene Smith for Summary Judgment and this action should be REMOVED from the court's docket. This case no longer referred to Magistrate Judge R. Clarke VanDervort. Objections to Proposed F&R due by 8/24/2009. Signed by Magistrate Judge R. Clarke VanDervort on 8/7/2009. (cc: Petitioner, pro se) (mjp)

Date Filed

Document Text

September 2, 2009

Filing 14 MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER ADOPTING 13 the PROPOSED FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION of Magistrate Judge R. Clarke VanDervort; DENYING plaintiff's application to proceed in forma pauperis; DENYING the petition for writ of habeas corpus (2241); DE NYING 8 and 9 plaintiff's motions for summary judgment; DISMISSING this case and DIRECTING the Clerk to remove it from the Court's active docket. Signed by Senior Judge David A. Faber on 9/2/2009. (cc: Plaintiff, Pro Se and counsel of record) (arb)

August 7, 2009

Filing 13 PROPOSED FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION of Magistrate Judge R. Clarke VanDervort RECOMMENDING that the District Court DENY 4 Petitioner's Application to Proceed in forma pauperis, Petitioner's 8 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus by a Pers on in Federal Custody, 9 MOTIONS by Rodney Eugene Smith for Summary Judgment and this action should be REMOVED from the court's docket. This case no longer referred to Magistrate Judge R. Clarke VanDervort. Objections to Proposed F&R due by 8/24/2009. Signed by Magistrate Judge R. Clarke VanDervort on 8/7/2009. (cc: Petitioner, pro se) (mjp)

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: Smith v. Gaither
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]
Petitioner: Rodney Eugene Smith
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: John Gaither
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?