Rizk v. Tedford

Rizk v. Tedford

Petitioner:	Sherif Rizk
Respondent:	Jeffrey Tedford
Case Number:	1:2018cv00204
Filed:	January 10, 2018
Court:	US District Court for the Southern District of New York
Office:	Foley Square Office
Presiding Judge:	Valerie E. Caproni
Presiding Judge:	Katharine H. Parker
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
May 13, 2020	Filing 26 CLERK'S JUDGMENT re: 25 Order Adopting Report and Recommendations. in favor of Jeffrey Tedford against Sherif Rizk. It is hereby ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED: That for the reasons stated in the Court's Order dated May 12, 2020, Mag istrate Judge Parker's August 26, 2019 R&R is adopted in full with one exception, which is indicated in note 2 of the Order; the petition for a writ of habeas corpus is denied; the Court declines to issue a certificate of appealability; Petition er has not made a substantial showing of the denial of a federal right pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c), and appeallate review is not warranted; the Court also finds pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that any appeal from this Order would not be taken in good faith, and permission to proceed in forma pauperis for purposes of appeal is denied. (Signed by Clerk of Court Ruby Krajick on 05/13/2020) (Attachments: # 1 Notice of Right to Appeal) (dt)
May 12, 2020	Filing 25 ORDER: Adopting REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS for 18 Report and Recommendation. For the foregoing reasons, the petition for a writ of habeas corpus is DENIED. The Court declines to issue a certificate of appealability. Petitioner has not made a sub stantial showing of a denial of a federal right pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c), and appellate review is therefore not warranted. Love v. McCray, 413 F.3d 192, 195 (2d Cir. 2005). The Court also finds pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that any appeal from this Order would not be taken in good faith, and permission to proceed in forma pauperis for purposes of appeal is denied. Coppedge v. United States, 369 U.S. 438, 445 (1962). The Clerk of Court is respectfully directed to close this case. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Valerie E. Caproni on 5/12/2020) (ama) Transmission to Orders and Judgments Clerk for processing.

Date Filed

Document Text

May 13, 2020

Filing 26 CLERK'S JUDGMENT re: 25 Order Adopting Report and Recommendations. in favor of Jeffrey Tedford against Sherif Rizk. It is hereby ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED: That for the reasons stated in the Court's Order dated May 12, 2020, Mag istrate Judge Parker's August 26, 2019 R&R is adopted in full with one exception, which is indicated in note 2 of the Order; the petition for a writ of habeas corpus is denied; the Court declines to issue a certificate of appealability; Petition er has not made a substantial showing of the denial of a federal right pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c), and appeallate review is not warranted; the Court also finds pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that any appeal from this Order would not be taken in good faith, and permission to proceed in forma pauperis for purposes of appeal is denied. (Signed by Clerk of Court Ruby Krajick on 05/13/2020) (Attachments: # 1 Notice of Right to Appeal) (dt)

May 12, 2020

Filing 25 ORDER: Adopting REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS for 18 Report and Recommendation. For the foregoing reasons, the petition for a writ of habeas corpus is DENIED. The Court declines to issue a certificate of appealability. Petitioner has not made a sub stantial showing of a denial of a federal right pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c), and appellate review is therefore not warranted. Love v. McCray, 413 F.3d 192, 195 (2d Cir. 2005). The Court also finds pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that any appeal from this Order would not be taken in good faith, and permission to proceed in forma pauperis for purposes of appeal is denied. Coppedge v. United States, 369 U.S. 438, 445 (1962). The Clerk of Court is respectfully directed to close this case. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Valerie E. Caproni on 5/12/2020) (ama) Transmission to Orders and Judgments Clerk for processing.

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: Rizk v. Tedford
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]
Respondent: Jeffrey Tedford
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: Sherif Rizk
Represented By:	Naved Amed
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?