Taylor v. Yelich

Taylor v. Yelich

Petitioner:	Daniel P. Taylor
Respondent:	Bruce Yelich
Case Number:	9:2016cv01210
Filed:	October 6, 2016
Court:	US District Court for the Northern District of New York
Office:	Prisoner Office
County:	Franklin
Presiding Judge:	Christian F. Hummel
Presiding Judge:	Frederick J. Scullin
Nature of Suit:	Habeas Corpus (General)
Cause of Action:	28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Jury Demanded By:	None

Follow case documents by RSS

Available Case Documents

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

Date Filed	Document Text
October 12, 2018	Filing 39 JUDGMENT entered dismissing the action in accordance with the 10/12/18 Order of Judge Scullin.{judgment served via regular mail on petitioner} (nas, )
October 31, 2016	Filing 5 MEMORANDUM-DECISION AND ORDER: ORDERS that Petitioner's IFP Application, see Dkt. No. 3 , is GRANTED. ORDERS that Petitioner's motion to stay the petition, see Dkt. No. 10 , is GRANTED. ORDERS that Petitioner must advise the Court, i n writing, every thirty (30) days of the status of the pending state-court proceedings, including the date on which any decision(s) are reached. ORDERS that, within thirty (30) days of the date on which the final state court capable of reviewing Pet itioner's applications has reached a decision, Petitioner must notify the Court, in writing, of that decision. ORDERS that, if Petitioner fails to comply with the terms of this Memorandum-Decision and Order, the stay shall be immediately lifted, and the Clerk of the Court shall return the file to this Court for further proceedings. Signed by Senior Judge Frederick J. Scullin, Jr. on 10/31/16. (served on petitioner by regular mail)(alh, )

Date Filed

Document Text

October 12, 2018

Filing 39 JUDGMENT entered dismissing the action in accordance with the 10/12/18 Order of Judge Scullin.{judgment served via regular mail on petitioner} (nas, )

October 31, 2016

Filing 5 MEMORANDUM-DECISION AND ORDER: ORDERS that Petitioner's IFP Application, see Dkt. No. 3 , is GRANTED. ORDERS that Petitioner's motion to stay the petition, see Dkt. No. 10 , is GRANTED. ORDERS that Petitioner must advise the Court, i n writing, every thirty (30) days of the status of the pending state-court proceedings, including the date on which any decision(s) are reached. ORDERS that, within thirty (30) days of the date on which the final state court capable of reviewing Pet itioner's applications has reached a decision, Petitioner must notify the Court, in writing, of that decision. ORDERS that, if Petitioner fails to comply with the terms of this Memorandum-Decision and Order, the stay shall be immediately lifted, and the Clerk of the Court shall return the file to this Court for further proceedings. Signed by Senior Judge Frederick J. Scullin, Jr. on 10/31/16. (served on petitioner by regular mail)(alh, )

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 New York Northern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Taylor v. Yelich
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]
Petitioner: Daniel P. Taylor
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: Bruce Yelich
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?