Ransey v. Willaims et al
Petitioner: Martice Ransey
Respondent: Attorney General of the State of Nevada and Sr. Brian Willaims
Case Number: 2:2015cv00919
Filed: May 15, 2015
Court: US District Court for the District of Nevada
Office: Las Vegas Office
Presiding Judge: Robert C. Jones
Presiding Judge: Nancy J. Koppe
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
March 27, 2018 Opinion or Order Filing 22 ORDER that the Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus ECF No. 6 is DENIED; petitioner is denied a certificate of appealability; Clerk directed to ENTER JUDGMENT. Signed by Judge Robert C. Jones on 3/27/2018. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - KW)
May 6, 2016 Opinion or Order Filing 18 ORDER denying ECF No. 11 Motion to Dismiss and denying ECF No. 16 Motion to Stay. Answer due within 60 days. Reply due 60 days thereafter. Signed by Judge Robert C. Jones on 5/6/16. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - JC)
January 5, 2016 Opinion or Order Filing 15 ORDER that Petitioner's time to Respond to the 11 Motion to Dismiss is extended to 2/19/2016. If Petitioner files a Response, Respondents shall have 30 days to file a Reply. Signed by Judge Robert C. Jones on 1/5/2016. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - SLD)
September 24, 2015 Opinion or Order Filing 9 ORDER Granting Respondents' 8 Motion to Extend Time re 6 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus. Respondents' Answer or Response due 10/19/2015. Petitioner has 60 days to file a Reply. If Respondents file a Motion to Dismiss Petitioner has 60 days to file a Response and Respondents have 30 days to file a Reply. Signed by Judge Robert C. Jones on 9/24/2015. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - SLD)
July 6, 2015 Opinion or Order Filing 5 ORDER Denying Petitioner's 2 Motion to Appoint Counsel. The Clerk shall file the 1 -1 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus and add Adam Paul Laxalt, Attorney General of the State of Nevada as counsel for Respondents. Respondents have 6 0 days from the date on which the petition is served upon them to appear in this action and to answer the petition. If Respondents file an answer Petitioner has 60 days to file an reply. Signed by Judge Robert C. Jones on 7/6/2015. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - Petition and Order mailed to Petitioner - SLD)
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 Nevada District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Ransey v. Willaims et al
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Respondent: Attorney General of the State of Nevada
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: Sr. Brian Willaims
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: Martice Ransey
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?