Hopper v. Ohio Department of Corrections et al
Petitioner: David S. Hopper
Respondent: Ohio Department of Corrections, Gary Mohr, Ohio State of and Mike DeWine
Case Number: 1:2014cv00652
Filed: August 14, 2014
Court: US District Court for the Southern District of Ohio
Office: Cincinnati Office
County: WARREN
Presiding Judge: Susan J. Dlott
Presiding Judge: Karen L. Litkovitz
Nature of Suit: General
Cause of Action: 28 U.S.C. ยง 2254
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 4, 2015 Opinion or Order Filing 33 ORDER ADOPTING 27 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS and 30 Report and Recommendations: It is hereby ORDERED that the Petition be DISMISSED with prejudice. Petitioner isalso DENIED any requested certificate of appealability and the Court hereby certifi es to theUnited States Court of Appeals that an appeal would be objectively frivolous. Signed by Judge Susan J. Dlott on 11/4/2015. (jlw)(This document has been sent by regular mail to the party(ies) listed in the NEF that did not receive electronic notification.)
October 16, 2015 Opinion or Order Filing 30 SUPPLEMENTAL REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS - Upon reconsideration, it is again respectfully recommended that the Petition be dismissed with prejudice. Because reasonable jurists would not disagree with this conclusion, Petitioner should be denied a cert ificate of appealability and the Court should certify to the Sixth Circuit that any appeal would be objectively frivolous and therefore should not be permitted to proceed in forma pauperis. Objections to R&R due by 11/2/2015. Signed by Magistrate Judge Michael R. Merz on 10/16/2015. (kpf)(This document has been sent by regular mail to the party(ies) listed in the NEF that did not receive electronic notification.)
September 21, 2015 Opinion or Order Filing 27 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS - It is respectfully recommended that the Petition be dismissed with prejudice. Because reasonable jurists would not disagree with this conclusion, Petitioner should be denied a certificate of appealability and the Court sh ould certify to the Sixth Circuit that any appeal would be objectively frivolous and therefore should not be permitted to proceed in forma pauperis. Objections to R&R due by 10/8/2015. Signed by Magistrate Judge Michael R. Merz on 9/21/2015. (kpf)(This document has been sent by regular mail to the party(ies) listed in the NEF that did not receive electronic notification.)
March 18, 2015 Opinion or Order Filing 16 ORDER ADOPTING 15 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS: respondent's motions 7 and 8 to dismiss are DENIED. Signed by Judge Susan J. Dlott on 3/18/2015. (jlw1)(This document has been sent by regular mail to the party(ies) listed in the NEF that did not receive electronic notification.)
February 17, 2015 Opinion or Order Filing 15 ORDER that petitioner's 2 MOTION to proceed in forma pauperis is Denied as Moot. Petitioner's 9 MOTION to amend is Granted. REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION that respondent's 7 & 8 MOTIONS to Dismiss be Denied. ( Objections to R&R due by 3/6/2015). Signed by Magistrate Judge Karen L. Litkovitz on 2/17/2015. (art)(This document has been sent by regular mail to the party(ies) listed in the NEF that did not receive electronic notification.)
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 Ohio Southern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Hopper v. Ohio Department of Corrections et al
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Petitioner: David S. Hopper
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: Ohio Department of Corrections
Represented By: William H Lamb
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: Gary Mohr
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: Ohio State of
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: Mike DeWine
Represented By: William H Lamb
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?