McCann v. Hill

McCann v. Hill

Petitioner:	Michael McCann
Respondent:	R. Hill
Case Number:	2:2011cv01463
Filed:	May 31, 2011
Court:	US District Court for the Eastern District of California
Office:	Sacramento Office
County:	Sacramento
Presiding Judge:	Dale A. Drozd
Presiding Judge:	Lawrence K. Karlton
Nature of Suit:	General
Cause of Action:	28 U.S.C. § 2254
Jury Demanded By:	None

Follow case documents by RSS

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:

Date Filed	Document Text
December 22, 2011	Filing 17 FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Dale A. Drozd on 12/21/11 RECOMMENDING that 11 MOTION to DISMISS for failure to exhaust state court remedies or alternatively, because petitioners claims are procedurally barred be granted and this action be closed. Referred to Judge Lawrence K. Karlton; Objections to F&R due within 21 days.(Dillon, M)
September 14, 2011	Filing 12 ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Dale A. Drozd on 9/13/11 ORDERING that within 21 days of the date of this order, petitioner shall file and serve an opposition to respondents motion to dismiss and shall show cause in writing why sanctions should not be imposed for the failure to file a timely opposition. In the alternative, if petitioner no longer wishes to proceed with this matter, he should file a request to dismiss this action without prejudice pursuant to Rule 41(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.(Dillon, M)

Date Filed

Document Text

December 22, 2011

Filing 17 FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Dale A. Drozd on 12/21/11 RECOMMENDING that 11 MOTION to DISMISS for failure to exhaust state court remedies or alternatively, because petitioners claims are procedurally barred be granted and this action be closed. Referred to Judge Lawrence K. Karlton; Objections to F&R due within 21 days.(Dillon, M)

September 14, 2011

Filing 12 ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Dale A. Drozd on 9/13/11 ORDERING that within 21 days of the date of this order, petitioner shall file and serve an opposition to respondents motion to dismiss and shall show cause in writing why sanctions should not be imposed for the failure to file a timely opposition. In the alternative, if petitioner no longer wishes to proceed with this matter, he should file a request to dismiss this action without prejudice pursuant to Rule 41(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.(Dillon, M)

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 California Eastern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: McCann v. Hill
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]
Petitioner: Michael McCann
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: R. Hill
Represented By:	Pamela B. Hooley
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?