Swift v. Superintendent
Petitioner: Lewis Swift
Respondent: Joseph H. Noah and Superintendent
Case Number: 9:2018cv01204
Filed: October 9, 2018
Court: US District Court for the Northern District of New York
Presiding Judge: Therese Wiley Dancks
Referring Judge: Glenn T Suddaby
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
Docket Report

This docket was last retrieved on March 17, 2022. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.

Date Filed Document Text
December 6, 2018 Opinion or Order Filing 5 Letter from Swift asking when he may request an evidentiary hearing. (nas, )
October 12, 2018 Opinion or Order Filing 4 TEXT ORDER RE: #2 Based on petitioner's certified IFP Application, he is eligible to proceed with this action without paying the statutory filing fee. His IFP Application is therefore GRANTED. Petitioner will still be required to pay fees that he may incur in the future regarding this action, including but not limited to copying fees ($.50 per page). Authorized by Magistrate Judge Therese Wiley Dancks on 10/12/18. {text order served via regular mail on petitioner}(nas, )
October 12, 2018 Opinion or Order Filing 3 DECISION AND ORDER: ORDERED that the Clerk terminate the named respondent and substitute the proper superintendent. ORDERED that the petitioner's request for appointment of counsel (Pet. at 6) is DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. ORDERED that the petitioner's alternate request to consider his attached appellate brief, and the arguments therein, as his memorandum of law in support of his present petition is GRANTED. ORDERED that the Clerk serve copies of this Decision and Order, the petition, and attachments upon respondent and the Attorney General of the State of New York in accordance with Local Rule 72.4(e). ORDERED that the respondent shall file and serve an answer to the petition, and provide the Court with the relevant records, within ninety (90) days of the date of this Decision and Order. ORDERED that petitioner may, but is not required to, file a reply within thirty (30) days of the filing date of respondent's answer.Signed by Magistrate Judge Therese Wiley Dancks on 10/11/18. [ response due by Superintendent served on 10/12/2018, answer due 1/10/2019]. (Attachments: #1 petition, #2 exhibits){served as directed}(nas, )
October 9, 2018 Opinion or Order Filing 2 MOTION for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis filed by Lewis Swift.(nas, )
October 9, 2018 Opinion or Order Filing 1 PETITION for Writ of Habeas Corpus filed by Lewis Swift. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit(s), #2 Civil Cover Sheet, #3 envelope)(nas, )

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: Swift v. Superintendent
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Respondent: Joseph H. Noah
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: Superintendent
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: Lewis Swift
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?