DAVIS v. KNIGHT
Petitioner: LEE DAVIS
Respondent: STANLEY KNIGHT
Case Number: 1:2020cv02067
Filed: August 6, 2020
Court: US District Court for the Southern District of Indiana
Presiding Judge: Tim A Baker
Referring Judge: James Patrick Hanlon
Nature of Suit: Habeas Corpus (General)
Cause of Action: 28:2254
Jury Demanded By: None
Docket Report

This docket was last retrieved on September 24, 2020. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.

Date Filed Document Text
September 24, 2020 Filing 10 Respondent's Notice of 42-day Extension of Deadline to File a Return to Order Show Cause, filed by STANLEY KNIGHT. Return to Order to Show Cause deadline is 11/5/2020. (Cornelius, Katherine)
September 1, 2020 Filing 9 NOTICE of Appearance by Katherine A. Cornelius on behalf of Respondent STANLEY KNIGHT. (Cornelius, Katherine)
August 17, 2020 Filing 8 CONSENT to Jurisdiction to US Magistrate Judge by LEE DAVIS. (DWH)
August 13, 2020 Opinion or Order Filing 7 Order on In Forma Pauperis Status - The petitioner's motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis, dkt. #3 is denied because the filing fee has been paid in full. Signed by Judge James Patrick Hanlon on 8/13/2020. (JDH)
August 13, 2020 Opinion or Order Filing 6 Order to Show Cause - Discipline Case - Lee Davis' petition for a writ of habeas corpus challenges his disciplinary conviction in disciplinary case number IYC 20-02-0071 The custodian of petitioner is directed to answer the allegations of the petition for a writ of habeas corpus and in doing so shall show cause why the relief sought by the petitioner should not be granted. Show Cause Response due by 9/24/2020. (SEE ORDER FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION AND DEADLINES). Signed by Judge James Patrick Hanlon on 8/13/2020.(DWH)
August 7, 2020 Filing 5 RECEIPT #IP070257 for filing fee in the amount of $5.00, paid by LEE DAVIS, JR. (DJH)
August 6, 2020 Filing 4 MAGISTRATE JUDGE's NOTICE of Availability to Exercise Jurisdiction issued. (REO)
August 6, 2020 Filing 3 MOTION for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis, filed by Petitioner LEE DAVIS. (Attachments: #1 Envelope)(REO)
August 6, 2020 Filing 2 PETITION for Writ of Habeas Corpus, filed by LEE DAVIS. (No fee paid with this filing) (Attachments: #1 Exhibit - Disciplinary documents, #2 Envelope)(REO)
August 6, 2020 Filing 1 CONSENT to Prisoner E-Service by LEE DAVIS located at PLAINFIELD CF. Pursuant to General Order 2013-1, documents submitted by LEE DAVIS to the court for filing will generate a Notice of Electronic Filing that will constitute official service upon registered users of CM/ECF. If any parties to the case are not registered CM/ECF users, the Clerk of the Court will mail the document via U.S. Postal Service on behalf of the inmate. NOTE: The E-Filing Program does not affect the obligation of other parties to serve copies of documents in accordance with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. (Attachments: #1 Envelope)(REO)

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

Search for this case: DAVIS v. KNIGHT
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Petitioner: LEE DAVIS
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: STANLEY KNIGHT
Represented By: Katherine A. Cornelius
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?