Smith v. Deville
| Clyde Edward Smith |
| Keith Deville |
| Attorney General State of Louisiana |
| 2:2018cv10642 |
| November 15, 2018 |
| US District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana |
| Janis van Meerveld |
| Jane Triche Milazzo |
| Habeas Corpus (General) |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 2254 |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on July 23, 2020. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 13 Correction of Docket Entry by Clerk re #12 Response to Habeas Petition. **Filing attorney incorrectly selected Attorney General State of Louisiana as a filer(s). Correct filer(s) is Keith Deville. Clerk took corrective action.** (mm) |
| Filing 12 RESPONSE to #1 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (28:2254) by Keith Deville.(Doskey, Ellen) Modified filer on 1/4/2019 (mm). |
Filing 11
ORDER granting #10 Motion for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply. Signed by Magistrate Judge Janis van Meerveld on 12/21/2018. (ajn)
|
| Filing 10 EXPARTE/CONSENT MOTION for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply by Attorney General State of Louisiana. Motion(s) referred to Janis van Meerveld. (Attachments: #1 Proposed Order)Attorney Ellen Daigle Doskey added to party Attorney General State of Louisiana(pty:res).(Doskey, Ellen) |
| Filing 9 Return of Service of H/C Response Order served on District Attorney's Office on 11/27/2018.(mm) |
| Filing 8 Return of Service of HC Response Order served on Clerk - Terrebonne Parish on 11/27/18.(sbs) |
| Filing 7 Return of Service of HC Response Order served on Attorney General's Office on 11/26/18.(sbs) |
|
Filing 6
Habeas Corpus Response Order that Attorney General for the State of Louisiana and the District Attorney and the Clerk of Court for Terrebonne Parish respond to the petition of Habeas Corpus within 30 days. Signed by Magistrate Judge Janis van Meerveld on 11/19/2018.(ajn) (Additional attachment(s) added on 11/29/2018: #1 Certified Mail Receipts) (ajn).
|
|
Filing 5
ORDER granting #2 Motion for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis. Signed by Magistrate Judge Janis van Meerveld on 11/19/2018. (ajn)
|
| Filing 4 Case transferred in from District of Louisiana Western; Case Number 5:18-cv-01399. Electronic file certified copy of transfer order and docket sheet received (clc) |
|
Filing 3
MEMORANDUM ORDER: Pursuant to the authority granted in 28 U.S.C. 1406, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Clerk of Court TRANSFER the above captioned case to the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana, the district in which the alleged cause of action arose. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that a determination of Petitioner's pauper status be deferred to the transferee court for resolution and disposition. Signed by Magistrate Judge Mark L Hornsby on 11/6/2018. (crt,Haik, K) [Transferred from lawd on 11/15/2018.]
|
| Filing 2 MOTION for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis by Clyde Edward Smith. (Attachments: #1 Envelope)(crt,Miletello, A) [Transferred from lawd on 11/15/2018.] |
| Filing 1 PETITION for Writ of Habeas Corpus filed by Clyde Edward Smith. (Attachments: #1 Civil cover sheet, #2 Memorandum / Brief, #3 Exhibit 1-3, #4 Exhibit 4-8, #5 Exhibit 9-11, #6 Envelope)(crt,Miletello, A) [Transferred from lawd on 11/15/2018.] |
| CASE Assigned to Chief Judge S Maurice Hicks, Jr and Magistrate Judge Mark L Hornsby. Motions referred to Magistrate Judge Mark L Hornsby. (crt,Thigpen, M) [Transferred from lawd on 11/15/2018.] |
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 Louisiana Eastern 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.
