Kearney v. Graham
| 1:2006cv06305 |
| November 20, 2006 |
| US District Court for the Eastern District of New York |
| Brooklyn Office |
| Carol B. Amon |
| 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
90
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER, denying Kearney's 89 Motion to Vacate Judgment, Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P., Rule 60(b)(6), 28 U.S.C.A. Kearney, furthermore, is ordered to show cause, within thirty (30) days from the date of this Order, why he should no t be barred from filing anything further in this action without first obtaining permission from this Court to do so. Nothing herein shall be construed to prohibit plaintiff from filing an appeal of this Order. Nevertheless, the Court certifies pursua nt to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that any appeal would not be taken in good faith and therefore in forma pauperis status is denied for the purpose of appeal. Since Kearney failed to make a "substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right," a Certificate of Appealability shall not issue. Ordered by Judge Carol Bagley Amon on 8/15/2017. c/m to petitioner. (Layne, Monique)
|
|
Filing
61
MEMORANDUM & ORDER: Petitioner's 60 May 29, 2012 motion is denied. The Court certifies pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that any appeal would not be taken in good faith and therefore in forma pauperis status is denied for purpose of an appeal. SO ORDERED by Chief Judge Carol Bagley Amon, on 8/1/2012. C/mailed to pro se Petitioner. (Latka-Mucha, Wieslawa)
|
|
Filing
59
ORDER denying 56 Motion to Vacate For the foregoing reasons, petitioners February 24, 2012 Motion is denied. The Court certifies pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that any appeal would not be taken in good faith and therefore in forma pauperis status is denied for purpose of an appeal. Ordered by Chief Judge Carol Bagley Amon on 5/10/2012. c/m to pro se plaintiff. (Shnider, Ruth)
|
|
Filing
41
MEMORANDUM & ORDER [TRANSFERRING CASE AS SUCCESSIVE PETITION]. Kearney now brings a 38 motion for reconsideration pursuant to Rule 60(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The Court treats this application as a second or successive petition. Accordingly, in the interest of justice, the Clerk of the Court shall transfer this petition to the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1631. If the Second Circuit authorizes Kearney to proceed in this m atter, he may move to reopen the proceeding under this docket number. The Clerk of the Court is directed to close this case. SO ORDERED. (Ordered by Judge Carol B. Amon, on 7/29/2010) C/mailed. (Forwarded to Appeals Section) This Court transfers this case to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit. (Latka-Mucha, Wieslawa)
|
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 New York 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
| Search for this case: Kearney v. Graham | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | 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.
