Dumont v. Superior Court El Dorado County
| Ralph E. Dumont |
| Superior Court El Dorado County |
| 2:2013cv02541 |
| December 9, 2013 |
| US District Court for the Eastern District of California |
| Sacramento Office |
| San Joaquin |
| Craig M. Kellison |
| General |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 2254 |
| None |
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing
84
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Craig M. Kellison on 6/22/2017 ORDERING petitioner's 82 motion to proceed on exhausted claims in this closed case is DENEID without prejudice to raising such claims in a newly-filed petition. (Yin, K)
|
|
Filing
78
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Craig M. Kellison on 03/30/17 granting 69 Motion to Dismiss. This action is dismissed. Petitioner's motion to expedite ruling 74 is denied as moot. The court finds that issuance of a certificate of appealability is not warranted in this case. The clerk of the court is directed to enter judgment and close this file. CASE CLOSED. (Plummer, M)
|
|
Filing
77
ORDER denying 68 Motion to Appoint Counsel signed by Magistrate Judge Craig M. Kellison on 03/02/17. (Plummer, M)
|
|
Filing
53
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Craig M. Kellison on 08/11/15 ordering the 7/24/15 order to show cause is discharged. Petitioner's amended petition 42 is dismissed with leave to amend. Petitioner's supporting exhibits 44 are disregarded. Petitioner shall file a single amended petition containing all claims and exhibits within 30 days of the date of this order. (Plummer, M)
|
|
Filing
51
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Craig M. Kellison on 7/23/2015 ORDERING petitioner to SHOW CAUSE in writing, within 30 days, why this action should not be dismissed for failure to comply with the court rules and orders. (Yin, K)
|
|
Filing
38
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Craig M. Kellison on 10/30/2014 DISMISSING petitioner's amended petition, with leave to file an amended petition, within 30 days; all supplements related to the amended petition 36 , 37 are STRICKEN; petitioner's 33 motion for a stay is DENIED as moot; the Clerk shall send petitioner a Section 2254 habeas petition form; and the Clerk shall update the docket to reflect the respondents named in the amended petition. (Yin, K)
|
|
Filing
32
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Craig M. Kellison on 07/24/14 Petitioner's motion 19 is construed as a motion for leave to conduct discovery and, so construed, is denied as premature. Petitioner's amended petition for a writ of habeas corpus 23 is dismissed with leave to amend. All supplements related to the amended petition 25 , 26 , 28 and 30 are stricken. Petitioner's motion for leave to present additional grounds for relief 31 is granted. Petitioner shall fil e an amended petition on the form provided by the clerk of the court which names the proper respondent and contains all asserted grounds from relief and supporting documentation in a single pleading within 30 days of the date of this order. The clerk of the court shall forward to petitioner the court's form section 2254 habeas petition. (Plummer, M)
|
|
Filing
22
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Craig M. Kellison on 02/24/14 granting 15 Motion to Proceed IFP. Petitioner's petition for writ of habeas corpus 1 is dismissed with leave to amend. Petitioner shall file an amended petition on the form em ployed by this court and which names the proper respondent and states all claims and requests for relief within 30 days of the date of this order. The clerk of the court is directed to send petitioner the court's form habeas corpus application. (Plummer, M)
|
|
Filing
14
ORDER denying 3 Motion to Appoint Counsel signed by Magistrate Judge Craig M. Kellison on 02/04/14. (Plummer, M)
|
|
Filing
12
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Craig M. Kellison on 01/15/14 ordering petitioner shall submit on the form provided by the clerk of the court, within 30 days from the date of this order, a complete application for leave to proceed in forma pauperis with the certification required by Rule 3(a)(2) or pay the appropriate filing fee. The clerk of the court shall send petitioner a new form application to proceed in forma pauperis by a prisoner. (Plummer, M)
|
|
Filing
5
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Craig M. Kellison on 12/16/13 ORDERING that Petitioner shall submit on the form provided by the Clerk of the Court, within 30 days from the date of this order, a complete application for leave to proceed in forma pauperis, with the certification required by Rule 3(a)(2), or pay the appropriate filing fee; and the Clerk of the Court is directed to send petitioner a new form Application to Proceed In Forma Pauperis By a Prisoner. (Dillon, M)
|
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 Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
| Search for this case: Dumont v. Superior Court El Dorado County | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Petitioner: Ralph E. Dumont | |
| 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: Superior Court El Dorado County | |
| 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.
