Shields v. Stallone

Shields v. Stallone

Petitioner:	Eric J. Shields
Respondent:	D. Stallone
Case Number:	1:2014cv07596
Filed:	September 12, 2014
Court:	US District Court for the Southern District of New York
Office:	Foley Square Office
County:	New York
Presiding Judge:	P. Kevin Castel
Presiding Judge:	Debra C. Freeman
Nature of Suit:	General
Cause of Action:	28 U.S.C. § 2254
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, 2016	Filing 31 ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION for 30 Report and Recommendation. There is no reason in this case to depart from the rule that an R&R to which no objection is lodged may be adopted unless the interests of justice dictate otherwise. This C ourt concludes that the R&R is well reasoned and correctly applied the governing law to the facts of Shields' case. Therefore, the R&R is adopted in its entirety. The Clerk is directed to enter judgment for the respondent and to close this case. Petitioner has not made a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right and, accordingly, a certificate of appealability will not issue. See 28 U.S.C. § 2253; Blackman v. Ercole, 661 F.3d 161, 163-64 (2d Cir. 2011). This Court cer tifies pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that any appeal from this order would not be taken in good faith and in forma pauperis status is denied. See Coppedge v. United States, 369 U.S. 438, 444-45 (1962). (Signed by Judge P. Kevin Castel on 10/12/2016) (kko)

Date Filed

Document Text

October 12, 2016

Filing 31 ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION for 30 Report and Recommendation. There is no reason in this case to depart from the rule that an R&R to which no objection is lodged may be adopted unless the interests of justice dictate otherwise. This C ourt concludes that the R&R is well reasoned and correctly applied the governing law to the facts of Shields' case. Therefore, the R&R is adopted in its entirety. The Clerk is directed to enter judgment for the respondent and to close this case. Petitioner has not made a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right and, accordingly, a certificate of appealability will not issue. See 28 U.S.C. § 2253; Blackman v. Ercole, 661 F.3d 161, 163-64 (2d Cir. 2011). This Court cer tifies pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that any appeal from this order would not be taken in good faith and in forma pauperis status is denied. See Coppedge v. United States, 369 U.S. 438, 444-45 (1962). (Signed by Judge P. Kevin Castel on 10/12/2016) (kko)

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 Southern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Shields v. Stallone
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]
Petitioner: Eric J. Shields
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: D. Stallone
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?