Roddy v. Plumley
Bobby Eugene Roddy |
Marvin C. Plumley |
2:2013cv31233 |
December 5, 2013 |
US District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia |
Charleston Office |
Mingo |
Joseph R. Goodwin |
Dwane L. Tinsley |
Mandamus and Other |
28 U.S.C. ยง 1651 |
None |
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
Document Text |
---|
Filing 18 ORDER accepting and incorporating the 11 Proposed Findings and Recommendation and orders judgment consistent with the findings and recommendations; overruling the petitioner's 13 objection; and denying the petitioner's 1 Petition for Writ of Mandamus; directing this action to be removed from the docket. Signed by Judge Joseph R. Goodwin on 6/27/2014. (cc: attys; any unrepresented party) (taq) |
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
Search for this case: Roddy v. Plumley | |
---|---|
Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
Respondent: Marvin C. Plumley | |
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: Bobby Eugene Roddy | |
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.