Ivey v. Gibson et al
Petitioner: David Ivey
Respondent: TyLynne Bauer and William R. Gibson
Interested Party: Nebraska Attorney General
Case Number: 8:2012cv00061
Filed: February 10, 2012
Court: US District Court for the District of Nebraska
Office: 8 Omaha Office
Presiding Judge: Laurie Smith Camp
Presiding Judge: Pro Se Docket
Nature of Suit: Habeas Corpus (General)
Cause of Action: 28 U.S.C. ยง 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Jury Demanded By: None

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:

Date Filed Document Text
March 28, 2012 Opinion or Order Filing 4 MEMORANDUM AND ORDER - IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that: Upon initial review of the Petition (Filing No. 1 ), the court preliminarily determines that Petitioner's claims, as set forth in this Memorandum and Order, are potentially cognizable in fe deral court. Petitioner's Motion for Appointment of Counsel (Filing No. 2 ) is denied without prejudice to reassertion. The Clerk of the court is directed to mail copies of this Memorandum and Order and the Petition to Respondents and the Neb raska Attorney General by regular first-class mail. By May 10, 2012, Respondent shall file a motion for summary judgment or state court records in 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: May 10, 2012: deadline for Respondent to file state court records in support of answer or motion for summary judgment; By May 10, 2012, Respondent shall file all state court records which are relevant to the cogni zable claims. See, e.g., Rule 5(c)-(d) of the Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases in the United States District Courts. Those records shall 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: June 11, 2012: check for Respondent to file answer and separate brief. No discovery shall be undertaken without leave of the court. See Rule 6 of the Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases in the United States District Courts. Ordered by Chief Judge Laurie Smith Camp. (Copies mailed as directed and to pro se party)(TCL )
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 Nebraska District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Ivey v. Gibson et al
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Respondent: TyLynne Bauer
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: William R. Gibson
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 ]
Petitioner: David Ivey
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 ]
Interested party: Nebraska Attorney General
Represented By: Jon C. Bruning
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.


Why Is My Information Online?