Brown v. Warden Warren Correctional Institution
Petitioner: James L. Brown
Respondent: Warden Warren Correctional Institution
Case Number: 1:2012cv00644
Filed: August 23, 2012
Court: U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Ohio
Office: Cincinnati Office
County: HAMILTON
Presiding Judge: Stephanie K. Bowman
Presiding Judge: Susan J. Dlott
Nature of Suit: General
Cause of Action: 28 U.S.C. ยง 2254
Jury Demanded By: None

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:

Date Filed Document Text
May 5, 2014 Opinion or Order Filing 42 DEFICIENCY ORDER - It is hereby ORDERED that Petitioner pay the filing fee of $505.00 not later than May 23, 2014, to the Clerk of this Court, or file by that date with the Sixth Circuit a motion to proceed on appeal in forma pauperis. Signed by Magistrate Judge Michael R Merz on 5/5/2014. (kpf1)
March 20, 2014 Opinion or Order Filing 35 SUPPLEMENTAL REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS - The Magistrate Judge again respectfully recommends that the Petition be dismissed with prejudice and that Brown be denied a certificate of appealability and leave to appeal in forma pauperis. Objections to R&R due by 4/7/2014. Signed by Magistrate Judge Michael R Merz on 3/20/2014. (kpf1)
February 5, 2014 Opinion or Order Filing 30 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS - It is respectfully recommended that the Petition herein be dismissed with prejudice. Because reasonable jurists would not disagree with this conclusion, Petitioner should be denied a certificate of appealability and the Court should certify to the Sixth Circuit that any appeal would be objectively frivolous. Objections to R&R due by 2/24/2014. Signed by Magistrate Judge Michael R Merz on 2/5/2014. (kpf1)
December 27, 2013 Opinion or Order Filing 26 ORDER - Upon Motion of the Petitioner (Doc. No. 24) and for good cause shown, the time within which Petitioner shall file his memorandum in opposition to Respondent's Motion to Dismiss (Doc. No. 15) is EXTENDED to and including January 24, 2014. No further extensions will be granted.Upon Petitioner's further Motion for an order to the Warden of the Toledo Correctional Institution to return Brown's "legal property" back to him (Doc. No. 25), the Court finds that the Warde n at Toledo should be, and hereby is, substituted as Respondent in this case upon Petitioner's reported change of address to the Toledo Institution (Doc. No. 17). Respondent's counsel is directed to inquire of the prison officials as to the status of Petitioner's possession of his files relating to this case, to ensure that all of them are in Petitioner's possession as soon as possible, and to report to the Court when that has been or was accomplished. Signed by Magistrate Judge Michael R Merz on 12/27/2013. (kpf1)
Access additional case information on PACER

Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the U.S. Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.

Access this case on the Ohio Southern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Brown v. Warden Warren Correctional Institution
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Respondent: Warden Warren Correctional Institution
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: James L. Brown
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?