Crawford v. Walters
| William Cody Crawford |
| Eric Walters |
| 1:2025cv01133 |
| April 7, 2025 |
| U.S. District Court for the Central District of Illinois |
| Colin Stirling Bruce |
| Habeas Corpus (General) |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa |
| None |
Docket Report
This docket was last retrieved on June 24, 2025. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 3 JUDGMENT ENTERED. (JA) |
TEXT ORDER entered by Judge Colin S. Bruce on 6/23/2025: Pursuant to the Court's May 12, 2025 Order #2 , Petitioner was ordered to show cause within 30 days as to why his Petition should not be dismissed for failure to exhaust. He was warned if he did not do so, then his case would be dismissed without prejudice for lack of prosecution. He has failed to respond to the Order. Accordingly, the Court now DISMISSES Petitioner's Petition #1 without prejudice for failure to prosecute and for failure to exhaust administrative remedies. The Clerk is DIRECTED to issue judgment in favor of Respondent. This case is CLOSED.(JA)
|
Filing 2
ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE entered by Judge Colin Stirling Bruce on 5/12/2025. Petitioner is ORDERED to show cause within THIRTY (30) DAYS as to why his Petition should not be dismissed for failure to state a claim. Petitioner is advised that if he does not respond to this order as directed, then his case will be dismissed without further notice and without prejudice for lack of prosecution. See written Order. (RAH)
|
| Filing fee: $ 5.00, receipt number 200001847 (JMB) |
| Filing 1 PETITION for Writ of Habeas Corpus, filed by William Cody Crawford. (RAH) |
TEXT ORDER entered by Judge Colin S. Bruce on 4/7/2025 directing the Petitioner to pay the filing fee of $5.00 within 30 days of this Order. If Petitioner is unable to pay the required filing fee, he may file a Motion for Leave to Proceed in Forma Pauperis. If Petitioner fails to pay the required filing fee or file a Motion for Leave to Proceed in Forma Pauperis within 30 days, his Petition under 28 U.S.C. Section 2241 for Writ of Habeas Corpus #1 will be dismissed without prejudice by this court. (RAH)
|
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 Illinois Central 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: Crawford v. Walters | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Petitioner: William Cody Crawford | |
| 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 | [ Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Respondent: Eric Walters | |
| 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 | [ 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.
TEXT ORDER entered by Judge Colin S. Bruce on 6/23/2025: Pursuant to the Court's May 12, 2025 Order #2 , Petitioner was ordered to show cause within 30 days as to why his Petition should not be dismissed for failure to exhaust. He was warned if he did not do so, then his case would be dismissed without prejudice for lack of prosecution. He has failed to respond to the Order. Accordingly, the Court now DISMISSES Petitioner's Petition #1 without prejudice for failure to prosecute and for failure to exhaust administrative remedies. The Clerk is DIRECTED to issue judgment in favor of Respondent. This case is CLOSED.(JA)