Pinson v. Davis
| Jeremy Pinson |
| Blake Davis |
| 1:2011cv01334 |
| May 20, 2011 |
| US District Court for the District of Colorado |
| Denver Office |
| Fremont |
| Boyd N. Boland |
| General |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 2241 |
| 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
39
ORDER denying 38 Motion to Vacate Judgment by Judge Wiley Y. Daniel on 2/17/15.(dkals, )
|
|
Filing
27
ORDER of Dismissal. The Application for a Writ of Habeas Corpus Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241 is DENIED and the action is DISMISSED with prejudice. Leave to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal is DENIED. I certify pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that any appeal from this Order is not taken in good faith, and, therefore, in forma pauperis status is denied for the purpose of appeal by Chief Judge Wiley Y. Daniel on 04/25/12. (jjhsl, )
|
|
Filing
22
ORDER to Dismiss in Part and for Answer in Part. ORDERED that the action is dismissed in part with prejudice because Mr. Pinson's claims regarding IR No. 1634068 either are an abuse of the writ or fail to state a claim. ORDERED that Respondent shall file a return certifying the true cause of the detention of Mr. Pinson and show cause in writing on or before Monday, November 7, 2011, why the writ, as it pertains to the remaining claims challenging Incident Report Nos. 1610661, 1655656, and 1619674, should not be granted. ORDERED that Mr. Pinson shall remain in custody and within the jurisdiction of this Court until further order by Chief Judge Wiley Y. Daniel on 10/05/11. (jjh, )
|
|
Filing
20
ORDER ASSIGNING CASE. This case shall be assigned to Chief Judge Wiley Y. Daniel, pursuant to D.C.COLO.LCivR 40.1C.1., and to Magistrate Judge Boyd N. Boland. By Magistrate Judge Boyd N. Boland on 10/3/2011. (sah2, )
|
|
Filing
16
MINUTE ORDER granting 15 Motion to Reconsider Order. Respondent is to provide Applicant with a copy of Exhibit A of the Preliminary Response on or before 8/26/2011, and to file a certificate of service with this Court. Applicant shall have 21 days to file a Reply, by Magistrate Judge Boyd N. Boland on 8/16/11.(lsw, )
|
|
Filing
14
MINUTE ORDER denying as moot Applicant's 13 Motion for Order to Re-serve. Respondent to provide Applicant with a copy of the Exhibit. Applicant shall have an additional 21 days, by Magistrate Judge Boyd N. Boland on 7/18/11.(lsw, )
|
|
Filing
5
Amended ORDER to File Preliminary Response within 21 days from the date of this order, by Magistrate Judge Boyd N. Boland on 6/10/11. (lsw, )
|
|
Filing
4
ORDER to File Preliminary Response within 21 days from the date of this order, by (no signature by a Judicial Officer) on 6/8/11. (lsw, )
|
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 Colorado 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: Pinson v. Davis | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Petitioner: Jeremy Pinson | |
| 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: Blake Davis | |
| 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.
