NELSON v. BRIGGS

NELSON v. BRIGGS

Petitioner:	ROBERT DAVID NEAL
Respondent:	LAURA BRIGGS
Case Number:	1:2011cv00558
Filed:	April 26, 2011
Court:	U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Indiana
Office:	Indianapolis Office
Presiding Judge:	Mark J. Dinsmore
Presiding Judge:	Jane Magnus-Stinson
Nature of Suit:	Habeas Corpus (Prison Condition)
Cause of Action:	28 U.S.C. § 1651 Petition for Writ of Coram Nobis
Jury Demanded By:	None

Follow case documents by RSS

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:

Date Filed	Document Text
August 10, 2011	Filing 21 ENTRY Discussing Post-Judgment Supplement to Petition for Writ of Mandamus. The second supplement does not seek relief from the disposition of this case, does not present any information of which the court is not already aware, and does not contain t he slightest hint that Neal is entitled to the relief he sought in bringing this action or in the second supplement itself. Any relief which the second supplement 17 and 19 can be construed as seeking is therefore denied. (See Entry - copy to petitioner via U.S. Mail). Signed by Judge Jane Magnus-Stinson on 8/10/2011. (MAC)
July 26, 2011	Filing 14 ENTRY and Order Directing Dismissal of Action - The court, having considered the petition for a writ of mandamus and the supplements thereto, and being duly advised, now finds that the petition for a writ of habeas corpus must be denied and the action DISMISSED. Judgment consistent with this Entry shall now issue. Signed by Judge Jane Magnus-Stinson on 7/26/2011.(JD)

Date Filed

Document Text

August 10, 2011

Filing 21 ENTRY Discussing Post-Judgment Supplement to Petition for Writ of Mandamus. The second supplement does not seek relief from the disposition of this case, does not present any information of which the court is not already aware, and does not contain t he slightest hint that Neal is entitled to the relief he sought in bringing this action or in the second supplement itself. Any relief which the second supplement 17 and 19 can be construed as seeking is therefore denied. (See Entry - copy to petitioner via U.S. Mail). Signed by Judge Jane Magnus-Stinson on 8/10/2011. (MAC)

July 26, 2011

Filing 14 ENTRY and Order Directing Dismissal of Action - The court, having considered the petition for a writ of mandamus and the supplements thereto, and being duly advised, now finds that the petition for a writ of habeas corpus must be denied and the action DISMISSED. Judgment consistent with this Entry shall now issue. Signed by Judge Jane Magnus-Stinson on 7/26/2011.(JD)

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 Indiana Southern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: NELSON v. BRIGGS
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]
Petitioner: ROBERT DAVID NEAL
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: LAURA BRIGGS
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?