Denson v. Neven et al
Petitioner: Richard Denson
Respondent: Attorney General of the State of Nevada and Dwight Neven
Case Number: 2:2015cv01473
Filed: July 31, 2015
Court: US District Court for the District of Nevada
Office: Las Vegas Office
Presiding Judge: Andrew P. Gordon
Presiding Judge: Peggy A. Leen
Nature of Suit: Habeas Corpus (General)
Cause of Action: 28:2254 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
February 21, 2019 Opinion or Order Filing 55 ORDER. IT IS ORDERED that 46 the petitioner's Second Amended Petitionfor Writ of Habeas Corpus is DENIED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the petitioner is denied a certificate of appealability. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of the Court is directed to enter judgment accordingly. Signed by Judge Andrew P. Gordon on 2/21/2019. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - ADR)
September 14, 2018 Opinion or Order Filing 49 ORDER. IT IS ORDERED that 48 the Respondents' Motion to Dismiss is GRANTED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Respondents shall, within 60 days from the date of this order, file an answer responding to the remaining claims in Petitioner's second amended habeas petition. Signed by Judge Andrew P. Gordon on 9/14/2018. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - ADR)
April 18, 2018 Opinion or Order Filing 47 ORDER denying 37 Motion to Dismiss; ORDER denying 43 Motion to Stay Case; Respondents answer due 90 days from date of this order. Signed by Judge Andrew P. Gordon on 4/18/2018. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - JM)
August 1, 2017 Opinion or Order Filing 36 ORDER. IT IS ORDERED that 35 respondents' motion for extension of time is GRANTED. Respondents will have until and including 9/28/17 to file a response to the amended petition for writ of habeas corpus. In all other respects, the schedule set forth in the order entered 5/31/17 31 shall remain in effect. Signed by Judge Andrew P. Gordon on 8/1/17. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - ADR)
July 11, 2017 Opinion or Order Filing 34 ORDER. IT IS ORDERED that 33 petitioner's motion for reconsideration is DENIED. Signed by Judge Andrew P. Gordon on 7/11/17. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - ADR)
May 31, 2017 Opinion or Order Filing 31 ORDER. IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that 30 petitioner's motion for appointment of counsel is DENIED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that respondents shall have 60 days from the date of entry of this order to answer or otherwise respond to the amended pet ition for writ of habeas corpus 29 . IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that if respondents file an answer, petitioner shall have 60 days to file a reply. Signed by Judge Andrew P. Gordon on 5/31/17. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - ADR)
March 21, 2017 Opinion or Order Filing 27 ORDER Granting 26 Motion to Extend Time. Petitioner will have until and including 5/30/17, to file an amended petition for writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 24 the Order entered 1/26/17. Signed by Judge Andrew P. Gordon on 3/21/15. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - ADR) Modified on 3/21/2017 to add Judge and date (ADR).
January 26, 2017 Opinion or Order Filing 24 ORDER. IT IS ORDERED that petitioner shall, within 20 days from the date of this order, file a notice informing the court of his current mailing address. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that 22 respondents' Motion for More Definite Statement is GRANTED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, within 60 days from the date of this order, petitioner shall file an amended petition for writ of habeas corpus as described above. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of the Court shall send petitioner, along with a copy of this order, two copies of the form for a petition for writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 by a person in state custody. Signed by Judge Andrew P. Gordon on 1/26/17. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - MR)
September 20, 2016 Opinion or Order Filing 21 ORDER Granting in part and Denying in part 20 Motion to Extend Time. Respondents shall have until and including 11/4/16, to answer or otherwise respond to 4 the petition for writ of habeas corpus in this case. Signed by Judge Andrew P. Gordon on 9/20/16. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - ADR)
June 10, 2016 Opinion or Order Filing 17 ORDER Granting 16 Motion to Extend Time re 4 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus. Attorney General of the State of Nevada and Dwight Neven answers due 8/19/2016. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, in all other respects, the schedule for further proceedings set forth in the order entered January 20, 2016 12 shall remain in effect. Signed by Judge Andrew P. Gordon on 6/10/16. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - TR)
January 19, 2016 Opinion or Order Filing 12 ORDER. IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Respondents shall have 90 days from the date of entry of this Order to Answer or otherwise respond to the Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus 4 .IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that if Respondents file an Answer, Petitio ner shall have 60 days to file a reply. If Respondents file a Motion to Dismiss, Petitioner shall have 60 days to file a response to the Motion to Dismiss, and Respondents shall, thereafter, have 30 days to file a reply insupport of the motion. Signed by Judge Andrew P. Gordon on 1/19/16. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - PS)
November 6, 2015 Opinion or Order Filing 8 ORDER GRANTING 7 Motion for Reconsideration and Other Relief pursuant to F.R.C.P. 60(b). IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that 6 Judgment entered 9/16/15, is VACATED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Petitioner shall have until 1/8/16 to pay the $5.00 filing fee for this action. Signed by Judge Andrew P. Gordon on 11/6/15. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - PS)
September 16, 2015 Opinion or Order Filing 5 ORDER. IT IS ORDERED that the Clerk of the Court shall separately file the Writ of Habeas Corpus. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Petitioner's 2 Motion for Appointment of Counsel is denied. ORDER Denying 2 Motion to Appoint Counsel. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that this action is dismissed without prejudice. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Petitioner is denied a certificate of appealability. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED the the Clerk of the Court shall enter judgment. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of the Court shall add Adam Laxalt, Attorney General of the State of Nevada, as counsel for respondents. Signed by Judge Andrew P. Gordon on 9/16/15. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - PS)
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 Nevada District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Denson v. Neven 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: Attorney General of the State of Nevada
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: Dwight Neven
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: Richard Denson
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?