Muncy v. McBride
Case Number: 3:2006cv00180
Filed: March 14, 2006
Court: US District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia
Office: Huntington Office
Presiding Judge: Robert C. Chambers
Presiding Judge: Maurice G. Taylor, Jr.
Nature of Suit: Habeas Corpus (General)
Cause of Action: 28 U.S.C. ยง 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
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
September 30, 2009 Opinion or Order Filing 21 MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER, the Court accepts and incorporates the 19 Findings and Recommendation of Magistrate Judge Taylor and grants the 11 Motion for Summary Judgment filed by Thomas McBride. The Court orders that this action be dismissed with judgment entered in favor of the respondent. Signed by Judge Robert C. Chambers on 9/30/2009. (cc: attys; any unrepresented party; Magistrate Judge Taylor) (gan)
July 29, 2009 Opinion or Order Filing 19 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS re: 2 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (2254) recommending that relief be denied and the petition for writ of habeas corpus be dismissed. This case no longer referred to Magistrate Judge Maurice G. Taylor, Jr. Objections to F&R due by 8/14/2009 Signed by Magistrate Judge Maurice G. Taylor, Jr. on 7/29/2009. (cc: attys; petitioner, respondent) (dcm)
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: Muncy v. McBride
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?