NUNLEY v. KALLIS et al
| WALTER J. NUNLEY |
| STEVE KALLIS, BRADLEY HAMMOND, ROBERT ORR and J. TURNER |
| 2:2024cv00020 |
| January 12, 2024 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of Indiana |
| M Kendra Klump |
| James R Sweeney |
| Habeas Corpus (General) |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 2241 fd Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federal) |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on March 8, 2024. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 15
ORDER - Respondent's motion for extension of time to respond to Petitioner's habeas petition, dkt. #12 , is denied as moot. Respondent timely filed the response. Dkt. #13 . Copy to petitioner via US Mail. Signed by Judge James R. Sweeney II on 3/8/2024. (KAA)
|
| Filing 14 RETURN TO ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE, re #10 Order to Show Cause, filed by STEVE KALLIS.. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit 1 - Declaration J. Turner, #2 Attach 1 - Sentence Monitoring Computation Data - Redacted, #3 Attach 2 - FSA Credit Assessment, #4 Attach 3 - J Turner email to Hammond re Nunley 10.23.23 - Redacted)(Kamper, Joi) |
| Filing 12 MOTION for Extension of Time to April 8, 2024 , filed by Respondent STEVE KALLIS. (Attachments: #1 Text of Proposed Order)(Kamper, Joi) |
| Filing 13 NOTICE of Violation of Mailings and Certificate of Service, filed by Petitioner WALTER J. NUNLEY (Attachments: #1 Envelope) (KAA) |
| Filing 11 NOTICE of Appearance by Joi Kamper on behalf of Respondent STEVE KALLIS. (Kamper, Joi) |
|
Filing 10
ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE - The United States is notified of the filing of the petition for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 2241 and of the supporting memorandum. This material has been scanned into the Court's electronic docket. A copy of this Order to Show Cause shall be distributed to the United States Attorney. The respondent shall have until March 7, 2024, in which to answer the allegations of the habeas petition, and in doing so shall show cause why the relief sought by the petitioner should not be granted. The respondent shall file its response to the petitioner's motion for preliminary injunction, dkt. 3, with its answer to the habeas petition. The petitioner shall have twenty-eight days after service of the answer in which to reply. Copy to Petitioner via US Mail. Signed by Judge James R. Sweeney II on 1/25/2024.(AAS)
|
| Filing 9 Rule 7.1 Disclosure Statement by WALTER J. NUNLEY. (Attachments: #1 Envelope) (JSR) |
| Filing 8 CONSENT to Jurisdiction to US Magistrate Judge by WALTER J. NUNLEY. (Attachments: #1 Envelope) (JSR) |
| Filing 7 RECEIPT #8700 for Filing fee in the amount of $5.00, paid by William Coakley on behalf of WALTER J. NUNLEY. (CCG) |
| Filing 6 Notice to File Rule 7.1 Disclosure Statement. (RAGS) (DJH) |
| Filing 5 MAGISTRATE JUDGE's NOTICE of Availability to Exercise Jurisdiction issued. (DJH) |
| Filing 4 MOTION For Request of Witnesses, filed by Petitioner WALTER J. NUNLEY. (Attachments: #1 Envelope)(DJH) |
| Filing 3 MOTION for Preliminary Injunction, filed by Petitioner WALTER J. NUNLEY. (Attachments: #1 Envelope)(DJH) |
| Filing 2 Letter from Walter J. Nunley re filing fee. (Attachments: #1 Envelope) (DJH) |
| Filing 1 PETITION for Writ of Habeas Corpus, filed by WALTER J. NUNLEY. (No fee paid with this filing) (Attachments: #1 Exhibits including Individualized Needs Plan -- Program Review, Male Custody Classification Form, FSA Recidivism Risk Assessment, letters, messages, #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
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.
