Kriz v. 12th Judicial District Board of Mental Health of Box Butte County
| Michael J. Kriz |
| 12th Judicial District Board of Mental Health of Box Butte County |
| Nebraska Attorney General |
| 4:2010cv03113 |
| June 11, 2010 |
| US District Court for the District of Nebraska |
| 4 Lincoln Office |
| Richard G. Kopf |
| Habeas Corpus (General) |
| 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
33
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER - Petitioner's Motion for Appointment of Counsel (filing no. 32 ) is denied without prejudice to reassertion before the Eighth Circuit. Petitioner's Motion for Leave to Appeal IFP (filing no. 22 ) is granted. The court declines to issue a certificate of appealability in this matter. The Clerk of the court shall provide the Court of Appeals a copy of this Memorandum and Order. Ordered by Judge Richard G. Kopf. (Copy mailed/e-mailed to pro se party) (AOA)
|
|
Filing
24
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER - Petitioner shall have until December 29, 2010, to file a motion for Certificate of Appealability and brief in support. In the event that Petitioner fails to file a motion and brief, as set forth in this Memorandum and Order, th e court will deny the issuance of a Certificate of Appealability without further notice. The Clerk of the court is directed to set a pro se case management in this case with the following text: December 29, 2010: check for filing of motion for Certificate of Appealability. Ordered by Judge Richard G. Kopf. (Copy mailed to pro se party) (AOA)
|
|
Filing
19
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER - Respondent's motion for summary judgment (filing no. 13 ) is granted as provided herein. A separate judgment will be issued dismissing this case without prejudice. Ordered by Judge Richard G. Kopf. (Copy mailed to pro se party)(GJG)
|
|
Filing
4
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER - Upon initial review of the Petition (filing no. 1 ), the court preliminarily determines that Petitioner's claim, as set forth in this Memorandum and Order, is potentially cognizable in federal court. The Clerk of the cou rt is directed to mail copies of this Memorandum and Order and the Petition to Respondents and the Nebraska Attorney General by regular first-class mail. By August 9, 2010, Respondent shall file a motion for summary judgment or state court records i n support of an answer. The Clerk of the court is directed to set a pro se case management deadline in this case using the following text: August 9, 2010: deadline for Respondent to file state court records in support of answer or motion for summary judgment. If Respondent elects to file an answer, the following procedures shall be followed by Respondent and Petitioner. By August 9, 2010, Respondent shall file all state court records which are relevant to the cognizable claims. Those records sh all be contained in a separate filing entitled: "Designation of State Court Records In Support of Answer." The Clerk of the court is directed to set a pro se case management deadline in this case using the following text: September 6, 2010: check for Respondent to file answer and separate brief. Petitioners Motion to Appoint Counsel (filing no. 3) is denied without prejudice to reassertion. Ordered by Judge Richard G. Kopf. (Copy mailed to pro se party and as directed)(GJG ) Modified on 6/25/2010 to reflect denial of petitioner's motion for appointment of counsel (AOA).
|
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
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.
