Loose v. Kogousek et al
Earl Joseph Loose |
John Suthers and Daniel C. Kogousek |
1:2011cv01634 |
June 22, 2011 |
US District Court for the District of Colorado |
Denver Office |
Pueblo |
Boyd N. Boland |
General |
28 U.S.C. ยง 2254 |
None |
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
Document Text |
---|
Filing 34 ORDER denying Motion to Reconsider. ORDERED that the request for rehearing, 32 , is construed as a Motion to Reconsider filed pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b) and is denied, by Judge Lewis T. Babcock on 10/31/11.(lyg, ) |
Filing 30 ORDER to Cure Deficiency re 26 Notice of Appeal by Earl Loose, appellant has 30 days to either pay the filing fee or file a 1915 motion with district court by Judge Lewis T. Babcock on 10/20/11. (bjr, ) |
Filing 24 ORDER of Dismissal. ORDERED that the Application is denied and the action is dismissed without prejudice. FURTHER ORDERED that no certificate of appealability shall issue, by Judge Lewis T. Babcock on 9/19/11. (lyg, ) |
Filing 23 ORDER Directing Applicant to File Amended Application, by Magistrate Judge Boyd N. Boland on 8/11/11. (lsw, ) |
Filing 17 ORDER Directing Applicant to File One Amended Application, within 30 days. FURTHER ORDERED that all pending motions 2 5 6 11 12 13 14 are denied as moot, by Magistrate Judge Boyd N. Boland on 7/28/11.(lyg, ) |
Filing 3 ORDER Directing Applicant to Cure Deficiencies within 30 days from the date of this order, by Magistrate Judge Boyd N. Boland on 6/29/11. (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
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.