Croft v. Houston
| Seth Croft |
| Robert Houston |
| 4:2009cv03185 |
| August 31, 2009 |
| US District Court for the District of Nebraska |
| 4 Lincoln Office |
| Johnson |
| Pro Se Docket |
| Laurie Smith Camp |
| None |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State) |
| None |
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing
26
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER - Petitioner's Motion for Leave to Appeal IFP 23 is granted. Petitioner's Motion for Certificate of Appealability 19 is denied without prejudice to reassertion before the Eighth Circuit; and The Clerk of the court shall provide the Court of Appeals a copy of this Memorandum and Order. Ordered by Judge Laurie Smith Camp. (Copy mailed to pro se party)(KBJ)
|
|
Filing
17
MEMORANDUM ORDER that Petitioner Seth Crofts Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Filing No. 1) is denied in all respects and this action is dismissed with prejudice; A separate judgment will be entered in accordance with this Memorandum and Order; and Croft's Motion for additional State Court Records 11 is denied as moot. Ordered by Judge Laurie Smith Camp. (Copy mailed to pro se party)(ADB, )
|
|
Filing
7
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER- Upon initial review of the Petition (Filing No. 1 ), the court preliminarily determines that Petitioners five claims are potentially cognizable in federal court; The Clerk of the court is directed to mail copies of this Memoran dum and Order and the Petition to Respondents and the Nebraska Attorney General by regular first-class mail; By November 13, 2009, Respondent shall file a motion for summary judgment or state court records in support of an answer. The Clerk of the co urt is directed to set a pro se case management deadline in this case using the following text: November 13, 2009: deadline for Respondent to file state court records in support of answer or motion for summary judgment; If Respondent elects to file a motion for summary judgment, the procedures shall be followed by Respondent and Petitioner as set forth within the order; If Respondent elects to file an answer, the following procedures shall be followed by Respondent and Petitioner as set forth wi thin the order. No discovery shall be undertaken without leave of the court. ***Pro Se Case Management Deadlines : deadline for Respondent to filestate court records in support of answer or motion for summary judgment ( Pro Se Case Management Deadline set for 11/13/2009.) Ordered by Judge Laurie Smith Camp. (Copies mailed as directed and to pro se party)(MKR)
|
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 Nebraska 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: Croft v. Houston | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Petitioner: Seth Croft | |
| 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: Robert Houston | |
| 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.
