Bazley v. Price
Petitioner: Michael Bazley
Respondent: Price
Case Number: 2:2015cv02673
Filed: December 28, 2015
Court: US District Court for the Eastern District of California
Office: Sacramento Office
County: Sacramento
Presiding Judge: Allison Claire
Nature of Suit: General
Cause of Action: 28:2254
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 26, 2020 Opinion or Order Filing 30 ORDER signed by District Judge Troy L. Nunley on 8/25/2020 ADOPTING 29 Findings and Recommendations in full. The petition for writ of habeas corpus is DENIED. The court DECLINES to issue certificate of appealability. The Clerk of the Court is directed to close this case. CASE CLOSED. (Zignago, K.)
July 15, 2020 Opinion or Order Filing 29 ORDER and FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Allison Claire on 7/15/2020 ORDERING Clerk to substitute the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation as respondent in this action and RECOMMENDING 1 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus be denied. Referred to Judge Troy L. Nunley. Objections due within 21 days after being served with these findings and recommendations. (Henshaw, R)
February 24, 2017 Opinion or Order Filing 23 ORDER signed by District Judge Garland E. Burrell, Jr on 2/24/17 ORDERING that the FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS filed 1/30/17 22 are ADOPTED in full; Respondent's MOTION to DISMISS Petitioner's Claim One, ECF No. 11 , is GRANTED; This action shall proceed on Petitioner's Claim Two and Three. Respondent is directed to file and serve an answer within sixty days after the filing date of this order. Petitioner is accorded the option of filing and serving a reply within thirty days after service of the answer. (Mena-Sanchez, L)
January 30, 2017 Opinion or Order Filing 22 ORDER, FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Allison Claire on 1/27/2017 ORDERING petitioner's 17 motion for appointment of counsel is DENIED without prejudice; and petitioner's 21 motion for an evidentiary hearing i s DENIED without prejudice. IT IS RECOMMENDED that respondent's 11 motion to dismiss petitioner's Claim One be granted; this action proceed on petitioner's Claims Two and Three; respondent be directed to file and serve an answer within 60 days, accompanied by all transcripts and other documents relevant to the remaining issues presented in the petition; and petitioner be accorded the option of filing and serving a reply within thirty days after service of the answer. Referred to Judge Garland E. Burrell, Jr.; Objections to F&R due within 14 days.(Yin, K)
February 19, 2016 Opinion or Order Filing 10 ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Allison Claire on 2/18/2016 DENYING without prejudice petitioner's 8 request for appointment of counsel. (Yin, K)
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: Bazley v. Price
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Petitioner: Michael Bazley
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: Price
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?