Hanzlik v. Joseph

Hanzlik v. Joseph

Petitioner:	Kimberly Hanzlik
Respondent:	Joseph Joseph
Case Number:	1:2017cv06577
Filed:	August 29, 2017
Court:	US District Court for the Southern District of New York
Office:	Foley Square Office
Presiding Judge:	Alvin K. Hellerstein
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
February 12, 2020	Filing 43 CLERK'S JUDGMENT re: 42 Order on Motion to Amend/Correct. in favor of Joseph Joseph against Kimberly Hanzlik. It is hereby ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED: That for the reasons stated in the Court's Order dated February 12, 2020, the petition is denied; as Petitioner has not made a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right, a certificate of appealability will not issue; accordingly, this case is closed. (Signed by Clerk of Court Ruby Krajick on 02/12/2020) (Attachments: # 1 Notice of Right to Appeal) (dt)
May 18, 2018	Filing 23 OPINION AND ORDER STAYING HABEAS PETITION: For the reasons stated herein, the Court enters a stay and abeyance of the petition to allow petitioner to pursue her unexhausted claims in state court. The stay is conditioned on petitioner pursuing relie f in the state court within 30 days of the filing of this Order, and petitioner may move to renew the petition, if necessary, within 30 after the state court proceedings are exhausted, and as further set forth herein. (Case stayed.) (Signed by Judge Alvin K. Hellerstein on 5/18/2018) (ras)

Date Filed

Document Text

February 12, 2020

Filing 43 CLERK'S JUDGMENT re: 42 Order on Motion to Amend/Correct. in favor of Joseph Joseph against Kimberly Hanzlik. It is hereby ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED: That for the reasons stated in the Court's Order dated February 12, 2020, the petition is denied; as Petitioner has not made a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right, a certificate of appealability will not issue; accordingly, this case is closed. (Signed by Clerk of Court Ruby Krajick on 02/12/2020) (Attachments: # 1 Notice of Right to Appeal) (dt)

May 18, 2018

Filing 23 OPINION AND ORDER STAYING HABEAS PETITION: For the reasons stated herein, the Court enters a stay and abeyance of the petition to allow petitioner to pursue her unexhausted claims in state court. The stay is conditioned on petitioner pursuing relie f in the state court within 30 days of the filing of this Order, and petitioner may move to renew the petition, if necessary, within 30 after the state court proceedings are exhausted, and as further set forth herein. (Case stayed.) (Signed by Judge Alvin K. Hellerstein on 5/18/2018) (ras)

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: Hanzlik v. Joseph
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]
Respondent: Joseph Joseph
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: Kimberly Hanzlik
Represented By:	Irving Cohen
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?