Baltes v. Williams
Petitioner: George W. Baltes
Respondent: D.K. Williams
Case Number: 3:2018cv01387
Filed: August 15, 2018
Court: US District Court for the District of Connecticut
Office: New Haven Office
County: Fairfield
Presiding Judge: Kari A Dooley
Referring Judge: Janet C Hall
Nature of Suit: Habeas Corpus (General)
Cause of Action: 28 U.S.C. ยง 2241
Jury Demanded By: None
Docket Report

This docket was last retrieved on May 10, 2019. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.

Date Filed Document Text
September 27, 2018 Reset Deadlines: Show Cause Response due by 10/15/2018 (Gould, K.)
September 27, 2018 Opinion or Order Filing 9 ORDER granting #6 Motion for Extension of Time upon review of both the motion and the petitioner's objection thereto. Signed by Judge Kari A. Dooley on 9/27/18. (Dooley, Kari)
September 26, 2018 Filing 8 OBJECTION re #6 MOTION for Extension of Time until October 15, 2018, to Respond re #4 Order to Show Cause,, filed by George W. Baltes. (Payton, R.)
September 20, 2018 Opinion or Order Filing 7 ORDER OF TRANSFER. Case reassigned to Judge Kari A Dooley for all further proceedings Signed by Clerk on 9/20/18.(Walker, J.)
September 19, 2018 Filing 6 MOTION for Extension of Time until October 15, 2018, to Respond re #4 Order to Show Cause,, by D.K. Williams. (Larson, John)
September 19, 2018 Filing 5 NOTICE of Appearance by John W. Larson on behalf of D.K. Williams (Larson, John)
August 17, 2018 Opinion or Order Filing 4 ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE: Upon the petition for writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 2241 filed on August 15, 2018, it is hereby ORDERED that the respondent file a response on or before September 24, 2018 why the relief prayed for in the petition for writ of habeas corpus should not be granted, and it is ORDERED that the Clerk serve a copy of this order and a copy of the petition and all attachments, to respondents representative, John Hughes, United States Attorney, Office of the United States Attorney, by email, onor before August 24, 2018. Show Cause Response due by 9/24/2018 Signed by Judge Janet C. Hall on 8/17/2018.(Lewis, D)
August 15, 2018 Opinion or Order Filing 3 PRISCS - STANDING PROTECTIVE ORDER Signed by Judge Janet C. Hall on 8/15/2018.(Fazekas, J.)
August 15, 2018 Opinion or Order Filing 2 PRISCS - ELECTRONIC FILING ORDER FOR COUNSEL - PLEASE ENSURE COMPLIANCE WITH COURTESY COPY REQUIREMENTS IN THIS ORDER Signed by Judge Janet C. Hall on 8/15/2018.(Fazekas, J.)
August 15, 2018 Filing 1 PRISCS - PETITION for Writ of Habeas Corpus, filed by George W. Baltes.(Fazekas, J.) (Additional attachment(s) added on 8/17/2018: #1 Attachments, #2 Envelope) (Fazekas, J.).
August 15, 2018 PRISCS - Filing fee received from George Baltes: $5.00, receipt number CTXB00009485. (Fazekas, J.) Modified on 8/16/2018 to add prefix (Fazekas, J.).

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

Search for this case: Baltes v. Williams
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Petitioner: George W. Baltes
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: D.K. Williams
Represented By: John W. Larson
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?