Meppelink v. Entzel
Petitioner: Richard Lee Meppelink
Respondent: Frederick Entzel
Case Number: 1:2020cv01317
Filed: September 8, 2020
Court: US District Court for the Central District of Illinois
Presiding Judge: Sara Darrow
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 November 4, 2020. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.

Date Filed Document Text
November 4, 2020 Filing 6 +++ SEALED DOCUMENT.. (Simpson, W.)
November 4, 2020 Filing 5 MOTION for Leave to File Document Under Seal by Respondent Frederick Entzel. Responses due by 11/18/2020 (Simpson, W.)
November 4, 2020 Filing 4 Appendix re #3 MOTION to Dismiss by Frederick Entzel. (Attachments: #1 Part 2)(Simpson, W.)
November 4, 2020 Filing 3 MOTION to Dismiss by Respondent Frederick Entzel. Responses due by 11/18/2020 (Attachments: #1 Cleotha Parker v. Warden, FCI Pekin, #2 Randall S. Schultz v. Warden, FCI Pekin, #3 Nathanial Rockwood v. F. Entzel, Warden, FCI Pekin,)(Simpson, W.)
October 27, 2020 Opinion or Order Filing 2 ORDER Entered by Chief Judge Sara Darrow on 10/27/2020. See written Order. The Court ORDERS Respondent to file an answer, motion, or other response, within twenty-one (21) days after service of this Order. After Respondent has filed its response, Petitioner is ORDERED to file any traverse or reply to Respondents response within twenty-one (21) days after service of said response on him. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Petitioner shall serve upon Respondent, or, if appearance has been entered by counsel, upon its attorney, a copy of every further pleading or other document submitted for consideration by the Court. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Petitioner immediately notify the Court of anychange in his mailing address. Failure to notify the Court of any change in mailing address will result in dismissal of this lawsuit, with prejudice.(RES, ilcd)
October 21, 2020 Filing fee: $ 5, receipt number 44626003828 (ANW, ilcd)
September 15, 2020 Opinion or Order TEXT ORDER entered by Chief Judge Sara Darrow on 9/15/2020. Petitioner has filed a Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 2241. Petitioner is directed to either pay the $5 filing fee or provide the Court with a signed Application to Proceed in District Court Without Prepaying Fees or Costs that also includes a copy of his trust fund ledger, certified by the appropriate institutional officer, showing all receipts, expenditures and balances for the last six months. Petitioner shall do so on or before October 15, 2020, or the Court will dismiss the case without prejudice for failure to pay the filing fee. The Clerk is directed to send Petitioner a copy of the forms for proceeding in forma pauperis.(KB, ilcd)
September 8, 2020 Filing 1 PETITION for Writ of Habeas Corpus, filed by Richard Lee Meppelink.(KB, ilcd)

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 Illinois Central District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Meppelink v. Entzel
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Respondent: Frederick Entzel
Represented By: W. Scott Simpson
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: Richard Lee Meppelink
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?