Westfall v. Austin et al
Petitioner: Christopher T Westfall
Respondent: Austin and Attorney General of the state of Sangamon County
Case Number: 1:2022cv01776
Filed: April 6, 2022
Court: US District Court for the Northern District of Illinois
Presiding Judge: John Robert Blakey
Nature of Suit: Prisoner: Habeas Corpus
Cause of Action: 28 U.S.C. ยง 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Jury Demanded By: None
Docket Report

This docket was last retrieved on May 17, 2022. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.

Date Filed Document Text
May 17, 2022 ELECTRONIC Acknowledgement of case transferred to the CENTRAL DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS as case 3:22-cv-03077, filed 05/17/2022. (aee, )
May 6, 2022 Filing 6 TRANSFERRED to the USDC Central Illinois, Springfield the electronic record. (nsf, )
May 5, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 5 ORDER: This case is transferred forthwith to the United States District Court for the Central District of Illinois, in Springfield, Illinois. The Clerk shall close this case on this Court's docket. Signed by the Honorable John Robert Blakey on 5/5/2022. Mailed notice (nsf, )
May 2, 2022 Filing 4 LETTER from Christopher T Westfall dated 04/18/2022 (Envelope postmarked 04/26/2022). (lxk, )
April 6, 2022 Filing 2 PRISONER CIVIL Cover Sheet. (jn, )
April 6, 2022 Filing 1 RECEIVED PETITION for writ of habeas corpus filed by Christopher T Westfall against Attorney General of the State of Sangamon County, Austin. (Exhibits). (jn, )
April 6, 2022 MAILED copy of the Clerk's Notice entry along with the Joint Consent form to Plaintiff Christopher T Westfall (jn, )
April 6, 2022 CASE ASSIGNED to the Honorable John Robert Blakey. Designated as Magistrate Judge the Honorable Young B. Kim. FEE DUE, NO INFORMA PAUPERIS APPLICATION SUBMITTED. Case assignment: Random assignment. (jn, )
April 6, 2022 CLERK'S NOTICE: Pursuant to Local Rule 73.1(b), a United States Magistrate Judge of this court is available to conduct all proceedings in this civil action. If all parties consent to have the currently assigned United States Magistrate Judge conduct all proceedings in this case, including trial, the entry of final judgment, and all post-trial proceedings, all parties must sign their names on the attached #Consent To# form. This consent form is eligible for filing only if executed by all parties. The parties can also express their consent to jurisdiction by a magistrate judge in any joint filing, including the Joint Initial Status Report or proposed Case Management Order. (jn, )

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

Search for this case: Westfall v. Austin et al
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Petitioner: Christopher T Westfall
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: Austin
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: Attorney General of the state of Sangamon County
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?