Wilkes v. Watson
Joseph Wilkes |
Warden Tom Watson |
5:2023cv01773 |
September 12, 2023 |
US District Court for the Northern District of Ohio |
Darrell A Clay |
James R Knepp |
Habeas Corpus (General) |
28 U.S.C. ยง 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State) |
None |
Docket Report
This docket was last retrieved on November 8, 2023. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
Document Text |
---|
Order [non-document] granting Respondent's #6 Unopposed Motion for extension of time to answer #1 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus. Tom Watson answer due 12/13/2023. Magistrate Judge Darrell A. Clay on 11/8/2023.(R,Ke) |
Filing 6 Unopposed Motion for extension of time until December 13, 2023 to answer #1 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus with Memorandum in Support filed by Respondent Tom Watson. (Rosenberg, Hilda) |
Filing 5 Attorney Appearance by Hilda Rosenberg filed by on behalf of Tom Watson. (Rosenberg, Hilda) |
Filing 4 Magistrate Judge's Initial Order. Respondent shall file an Answer (Return of Writ) to the petition within sixty (60) days from the date of this Order. The Answer shall comply with Rule 5 of the Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases and shall address all legal issues raised in the petition. Petitioner shall have thirty (30) days from the filing of Respondent's Return of Writ to reply thereto by filing a Traverse. Respondent shall have fifteen (15) days from the filing of Petitioner's Traverse to respond thereto by filing a sur-reply. Magistrate Judge Darrell A. Clay on 9/14/2023. (R,Ke) |
Copy of #1 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (2254), #4 Magistrate Judge's Initial Order, emailed to the Office of the Attorney General on 9/14/2023. (R,Ke) |
Automatic Reference [non-document] of Administrative Action to Magistrate Judge Darrell A. Clay pursuant to Local Rule 72.2. Judge James R. Knepp II on 9/13/2023. (B,JL) |
Filing 3 Administrative Track DCM Initial Order. Chief Judge Sara Lioi. (E,CK) |
Filing 2 Motion to stay and abey pending resolution of state proceedings related to Habeas Petition filed by Petitioner Joseph Wilkes. Related document(s) #1 . (Cartwright-Jones, Rhys) Modified text on 9/12/2023 (E,CK). |
Filing 1 Petition under 28 USC 2254 for Writ of Habeas Corpus by a person in state custody. Filing fee paid $ 5, receipt number AOHNDC-12175091. Filed by Joseph Wilkes. (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet, #2 Memorandum in Support) (Cartwright-Jones, Rhys) |
Judge James R. Knepp II assigned to case. (E,CK) |
Random Assignment of Magistrate Judge pursuant to Local Rule 3.1. In the event of a referral, case will be assigned to Magistrate Judge Darrell A. Clay. (E,CK) |
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 Ohio Northern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
Search for this case: Wilkes v. Watson | |
---|---|
Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
Petitioner: Joseph Wilkes | |
Represented By: | Rhys B. Cartwright-Jones |
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: Warden Tom Watson | |
Represented By: | Hilda Rosenberg |
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.