Serrano v. Plants
Petitioner: Michael Serrano
Respondent: Mark Plants
Case Number: 2:2010cv00998
Filed: August 6, 2010
Court: US District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia
Office: Charleston Office
County: Kanawha
Nature of Suit: Other
Cause of Action: 77 U.S.C. ยง 7777
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
November 9, 2010 Opinion or Order Filing 6 MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER adopting and incorporating the 5 Proposed Findings and Recommendation; denying without prejudice the 1 section 2254 petition; and this action is dismissed without prejudice and stricken from the docket. Signed by Judge John T. Copenhaver, Jr. on 11/9/2010. (cc: pro se petitioner; attys; United States Magistrate Judge) (taq)
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: Serrano v. Plants
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Petitioner: Michael Serrano
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: Mark Plants
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?