PRATHER v. VANHIL
| REGINALD PRATHER |
| VANHIL |
| 2:2023cv00264 |
| May 30, 2023 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of Indiana |
| Mario Garcia |
| James Patrick Hanlon |
| Habeas Corpus (General) |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State) |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on July 21, 2023. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 11
ORDER REFERRING CASE to Magistrate Judge - The parties have consented to the exercise of jurisdiction by a United States Magistrate Judge. Dkts. #4 , #9 , #10 . This case is, therefore, REFERRED to the currently assigned United States Magistrate Judge, The Honorable Mario Garcia, to conduct all proceedings and order the entry of judgment in accordance with 28 U.S.C. 636(c) and Fed. R. Civ. P. 73. This action's case number SHALL be amended to 2:23-cv-00264-MG-JPH to reflect this referral to the Magistrate Judge. Copy to petitioner via US Mail. Signed by Judge James Patrick Hanlon on 7/21/2023.(KAA)
|
| Filing 10 JOINT CONSENT to Jurisdiction to US Magistrate Judge by VANHIL. (Arthur, David) |
| Filing 9 JOINT CONSENT to Jurisdiction to US Magistrate Judge by VANHIL. (Arthur, David) |
| Filing 8 NOTICE of Appearance by David A. Arthur on behalf of Respondent VANHIL. (Arthur, David) |
| Filing 7 RECEIPT #5737 for Filing fee in the amount of $5, paid by REGINALD PRATHER. (CCG) |
|
Filing 6
ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE (Disciplinary) - The petitioner shall have through July 14, 2023, in which to either pay the $5.00 filing fee for this action or demonstrate his financial inability to do so. 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 8/1/2023. Signed by Judge James Patrick Hanlon on 6/20/2023 (Copy mailed to Petitioner).(LBT)
|
| Filing 5 Submission copy of #3 Notice to File Rule 7.1 Disclosure Statement, filed by Petitioner REGINALD PRATHER. (Attachments: #1 Envelope)(DWH) |
| Filing 4 CONSENT to Jurisdiction to US Magistrate Judge by REGINALD PRATHER. (Attachments: #1 Envelope)(DWH) |
| Filing 3 Notice to File Rule 7.1 Disclosure Statement. (RAGS) (DJH) |
| Filing 2 MAGISTRATE JUDGE's NOTICE of Availability to Exercise Jurisdiction issued. (DJH) |
| Filing 1 PETITION for Writ of Habeas Corpus, filed by REGINALD PRATHER. (No fee paid with this filing) (Attachments: #1 Exhibits including Proposed Order For Writ Of To Issue, Proposed Writ, Report of Disciplinary Hearing, and Order Of Dismissal, #2 Cover Letter, #3 Envelope)(DJH) |
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 Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
| Search for this case: PRATHER v. VANHIL | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Petitioner: REGINALD PRATHER | |
| 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: VANHIL | |
| Represented By: | David A. Arthur |
| 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.
