KUBIS v. THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY OF THE COUNTY OF BUCKS et al
Petitioner: GEORGE VINCENT KUBIS
Respondent: THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY OF THE COUNTY OF BUCKS, THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA and JOHN WETZEL
Case Number: 2:2015cv02142
Filed: April 20, 2015
Court: US District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania
Office: Philadelphia Office
County: Forest
Presiding Judge: LYNNE A. SITARSKI
Presiding Judge: WILLIAM H. YOHN
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
August 4, 2020 Opinion or Order Filing 61 ORDERED THAT THE MOTION 49 IS DISMISSED FOR LACK OF JURISDICTION FOR THE REASONS SET FORTH IN THE COURTS MEMORANDUM ACCOMPANYING THIS ORDER. A CERTIFICATE OF APPEALABILITY IS DENIED. SIGNED BY HONORABLE WENDY BEETLESTONE ON 7/29/20. 8/4/20 ENTERED AND COPIES NOT MAILED TO PRO SE PETITIONER AND E-MAILED.(jpd)
July 31, 2020 Opinion or Order Filing 59 ORDERED THAT THE MOTION IS DISMISSED FOR LACK OF JURISDICTION FOR THE REASONS SET FORTH IN THE COURTS MEMORANDUM ACCOMPANYING THIS ORDER. A CERTIFICATE OF APPEALABILITY IS DENIED PURSUANT TO 28 U.S.C. § 2253(C) BECAUSE REASONABLE JURISTS WOULD N OT DEBATE THE PROPRIETY OF THIS COURTS PROCEDURAL RULING WITH RESPECT TO THESE CLAIMS. SEE SLACK V. MCDANIEL, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000).. SIGNED BY HONORABLE WENDY BEETLESTONE ON 7/31/20. 7/31/20 ENTERED AND COPIES NOT MAILED TO PRO SE PETITIONER AND E-MAILED.(jpd, )
July 30, 2020 Opinion or Order Filing 57 MEMORANDUM OPINION ORDER THAT THE MOTION FOR RELIEF FROM JUDGMENT (DOC. NO. 49 ) IS DISMISSED. A CERTIFICATE OF APPEALABILITY IS DENIED. SIGNED BY HONORABLE WENDY BEETLESTONE ON 7/29/20. 7/31/20 ENTERED AND COPIES NOT MAILED TO PRO SE; E-MAILED.(amas, )
September 14, 2018 Opinion or Order Filing 36 ORDER THAT THE REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVED AND ADOPTED; THE PETITION FOR A WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS FILED PURSUANT TO 28 USC, SECTION 2254 IS DENIED WITHOUT AN EVIDENTIARY HEARING; THERE IS NO BASIS FOR THE ISSUANCE OF A CERTIFICATE OF APPEALABILITY.. SIGNED BY HONORABLE WENDY BEETLESTONE ON 9/14/18. 9/14/18 ENTERED AND COPIES MAILED TO PRO SE PETITIONER AND E-MAILED TO COUNSEL.(pr, )
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 Pennsylvania Eastern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: KUBIS v. THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY OF THE COUNTY OF BUCKS 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: GEORGE VINCENT KUBIS
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: THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY OF THE COUNTY OF BUCKS
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: THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA
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: JOHN WETZEL
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?