Poulton v. Warden, Ross Correctional Institution
| Adam C. Poulton |
| Warden, Ross Correctional Institution |
| 2:2015cv02352 |
| June 4, 2015 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of Ohio |
| Columbus Office |
| MUSKINGUM |
| Elizabeth Preston Deavers |
| Edmund A. Sargus |
| General |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 2254 |
| None |
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing
46
ORDER ADOPTING and AFFIRMING the REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION 44 in that this case is DISMISSED. The Court DECLINES to issue a Certificate of Appealability. Signed by Chief Judge Edmund A. Sargus on 6/15/18. (sem)(This document has been sent by regular mail to the party(ies) listed in the NEF that did not receive electronic notification.)
|
|
Filing
44
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION: The Magistrate Judge RECOMMENDS that this action be DISMISSED re 1 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus filed by Adam C. Poulton, 4 Amended Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus filed by Adam C. Poulton. Objections to R&R due by 5/14/2018. Signed by Magistrate Judge Elizabeth Preston Deavers on April 30, 2018. (jlk) (This document has been sent by regular mail to the party(ies) listed in the NEF that did not receive electronic notification.)
|
|
Filing
39
ORDER denying 34 Motion to Appoint Counsel ; denying 35 Motion for Discovery; granting 32 Motion to Terminate Stay and Motion to Supplement the State Court Record ; granting 33 Motion to Amend/Correct. Signed by Magistrate Judge Elizabeth Preston Deavers on January 24, 2018. (jlk) (This document has been sent by regular mail to the party(ies) listed in the NEF that did not receive electronic notification.)
|
|
Filing
24
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS. Signed by Chief Judge Edmund A. Sargus on 8/3/16. (lvw)(This document has been sent by regular mail to the party(ies) listed in the NEF that did not receive electronic notification.)
|
|
Filing
19
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION re 1 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus: The Magistrate Judge RECOMMENDS that Petitioner's Motion to Stay 9 be GRANTED; that Respondent's Motion to Dismiss 6 on grounds of exhaustion at this time be DENIED ; and that Petitioner be DIRECTED advise the Court of the status of state court proceedings on his petition for post conviction relief every sixty (60) days. Objections to R&R due by 6/20/2016. Signed by Magistrate Judge Elizabeth Preston Deavers on 6/1/2016. (mas)(This document has been sent by regular mail to the party(ies) listed in the NEF that did not receive electronic notification.)
|
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 Southern 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: Poulton v. Warden, Ross Correctional Institution | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Petitioner: Adam C. Poulton | |
| 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, Ross Correctional Institution | |
| Represented By: | Jerri Lynne Fosnaught |
| 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.
