Bodolla v. Hornbeak

Bodolla v. Hornbeak

Petitioner:	Adriana Arzola Bodolla
Respondent:	Tina Hornbeak
Case Number:	3:2008cv00172
Filed:	January 11, 2008
Court:	US District Court for the Northern District of California
Office:	San Francisco Office
County:	Madera
Presiding Judge:	Susan Illston
Nature of Suit:	Habeas Corpus (General)
Cause of Action:	28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
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
January 26, 2009	Filing 17 JUDGMENT: The petition for writ of habeas corpus is dismissed because it was not filed before the expiration of the habeas statute of limitations period. Signed by Judge Susan Illston. (SI, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 1/26/2009)
February 4, 2008	Filing 4 ORDER: The clerk shall serve by certified mail a copy of this order, the petition, and all attachments upon respondent and respondent's attorney, the Attorney General of the State of California. The clerk also shall send a copy of this order t o petitioner. Respondent must file and serve a motion to dismiss no later than 4/4/08. If petitioner wishes to oppose motion to dismiss, she must do so by filing an opposition with the court and serving a copy upon respondent no later than 5/9/08. Respondent must file and serve her reply, if any, no later than 5/30/08. Denying 3 petitioenr's in forma pauperis application. She must pay the $5.00 filing fee no later than 3/14/08. Signed by Judge Susan Illston. (SI, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 2/4/2008) (Additional attachment(s) added on 2/7/2008: # 1 Certificte of Service) (ys, COURT STAFF).

Date Filed

Document Text

January 26, 2009

Filing 17 JUDGMENT: The petition for writ of habeas corpus is dismissed because it was not filed before the expiration of the habeas statute of limitations period. Signed by Judge Susan Illston. (SI, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 1/26/2009)

February 4, 2008

Filing 4 ORDER: The clerk shall serve by certified mail a copy of this order, the petition, and all attachments upon respondent and respondent's attorney, the Attorney General of the State of California. The clerk also shall send a copy of this order t o petitioner. Respondent must file and serve a motion to dismiss no later than 4/4/08. If petitioner wishes to oppose motion to dismiss, she must do so by filing an opposition with the court and serving a copy upon respondent no later than 5/9/08. Respondent must file and serve her reply, if any, no later than 5/30/08. Denying 3 petitioenr's in forma pauperis application. She must pay the $5.00 filing fee no later than 3/14/08. Signed by Judge Susan Illston. (SI, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 2/4/2008) (Additional attachment(s) added on 2/7/2008: # 1 Certificte of Service) (ys, COURT STAFF).

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 Northern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Bodolla v. Hornbeak
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]
Petitioner: Adriana Arzola Bodolla
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: Tina Hornbeak
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?