MARTS v. INCH
Petitioner: SIDNEY MARTS
Respondent: MARK S INCH
Case Number: 4:2019cv00412
Filed: August 26, 2019
Court: U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Florida
Presiding Judge: CHARLES A STAMPELOS
Referring Judge: MARK E WALKER
Nature of Suit: Habeas Corpus (General)
Cause of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241
Jury Demanded By: None
Docket Report

This docket was last retrieved on April 23, 2020. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.

Date Filed Document Text
October 22, 2019 ACTION REQUIRED BY MAGISTRATE JUDGE: Chambers of MAGISTRATE JUDGE CHARLES A STAMPELOS notified that action is needed Re: #11 Petitioners Cross-Motion To Dismiss Response Referred to CHARLES A STAMPELOS. (rcb)
October 21, 2019 Filing 11 Petitioners Cross-Motion To Dismiss Response With Application For A Limited Order To Stay And Hold Federal Habeas In Abeyance Based Upon Petitioner's Attached With Attachments by SIDNEY MARTS. (rcb)
October 7, 2019 Opinion or Order Filing 10 ORDER DENYING #9 MOTION TO AMEND JUDGMENT. This Court has considered, without hearing, Petitioner's Motion to Alter/Amend Judgment. ECF No. #9 . No judgment has been entered in this case, and therefore the motion is DENIED. Signed by CHIEF JUDGE MARK E WALKER on 10/08/2019. (rcb)
October 7, 2019 Filing 9 Motion to Alter Amend Judgment by SIDNEY MARTS. (rcb)
October 7, 2019 Motions No Longer Referred: #9 MOTION to Alter Amend Judgment (vkm)
October 7, 2019 ACTION REQUIRED BY MAGISTRATE JUDGE: Chambers of MAGISTRATE JUDGE CHARLES A STAMPELOS notified that action is needed Re: #9 Motion to Alter Amend Judgment Referred to CHARLES A STAMPELOS. (rcb)
October 7, 2019 ACTION REQUIRED BY MAGISTRATE JUDGE: Chambers of MAGISTRATE JUDGE CHARLES A STAMPELOS notified that action is needed Re: #3 Order.***Petitioner did not file an IFP application or pay the $5.00 filing fee by 9/29/2019*** (rcb)
September 30, 2019 Opinion or Order Filing 8 ORDER DIRECTING RESPONSE TO AMENDED 2241 PETITION. The Clerk shall serve copies of the amended 2241 petition (ECF No. #5 ) and this order on Respondent and the Attorney General of the State of Florida. Respondent shall file an answer, motion, or other response to the petition on or before 12/30/2019. Petitioner shall file a reply, if any, no later than 1/29/2020. Signed by MAGISTRATE JUDGE CHARLES A STAMPELOS on 09/30/2019. (rcb)***Copy of Amended Petition #5 and Order #8 mailed as directed***
September 25, 2019 ACTION REQUIRED BY MAGISTRATE JUDGE: Chambers of MAGISTRATE JUDGE CHARLES A STAMPELOS notified that action is needed Re: #7 Order Affirming Magistrate Judge's Order Directing Petitioner to Pay Filing Fee or Submit an IFP Application. (rcb)
September 25, 2019 Set Deadlines/Hearings Fee due by 9/27/2019 or IFP Motions due by 9/27/2019. (rcb)
September 20, 2019 Opinion or Order Filing 7 ORDER AFFIRMING MAGISTRATE JUDGE'S ORDER DIRECTING PETITIONER TO PAY FILING FEE OR SUBMIT AN IFP APPLICATION. Accordingly, Petitioner's objection, ECF No. #6 , to the Magistrate Judge's order, ECF No. #3 , is OVERRULED and the Magistrate Judge's order, ECF No. #3 , is AFFIRMED. Signed by CHIEF JUDGE MARK E WALKER on 09/20/2019. (rcb)
September 17, 2019 ACTION REQUIRED BY DISTRICT JUDGE: Chambers of CHIEF JUDGE MARK E WALKER notified that action is needed Re: #6 Notice of Appeal to District Judge construed as an Objection to the Presiding District Judge. (rcb)
September 17, 2019 ACTION REQUIRED BY MAGISTRATE JUDGE: Chambers of MAGISTRATE JUDGE CHARLES A STAMPELOS notified that action is needed Re: #5 First Amended Complaint. (rcb)
September 16, 2019 Filing 6 Notice of Appeal to District Judge construed as an Objection to the Presiding District Judge by SIDNEY MARTS (rcb)
September 16, 2019 Filing 5 FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT against MARK S INCH, filed by SIDNEY MARTS. (rcb)***No IFP or Service Copies Provided***
September 13, 2019 ACTION REQUIRED BY MAGISTRATE JUDGE: Chambers of MAGISTRATE JUDGE CHARLES A STAMPELOS notified that action is needed Re: 4 Initial Filing Fee Received. (rcb)
September 12, 2019 Filing 4 Initial Filing fee: $ 5.00, receipt number FLN400037551. Fee status updated to paid. (rcb)
August 28, 2019 Opinion or Order Filing 3 ORDER. The Clerk of Court shall forward to Petitioner an application for leave to proceed IFP. Petitioner shall have until 9/27/2019, to either file an IFP application or pay the $5.00 filing fee. Signed by MAGISTRATE JUDGE CHARLES A STAMPELOS on 8/28/2019. (rcb) ***IFP application mailed as directed on 8/28/2019***
August 27, 2019 ACTION REQUIRED BY MAGISTRATE JUDGE: Chambers of MAGISTRATE JUDGE CHARLES A STAMPELOS notified that action is needed Re: #1 2241 Habeas Corpus Petition Form (rcb)
August 26, 2019 Filing 2 Notice to Pro Se (rcb)
August 26, 2019 Filing 1 2241 Habeas Corpus Petition Form, filed by SIDNEY MARTS. (rcb)***NO IFP motion or service copies provided***

Access additional case information on PACER

Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the U.S. Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.

Access this case on the Florida Northern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: MARTS v. INCH
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Respondent: MARK S INCH
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 ]
Petitioner: SIDNEY MARTS
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?