Parrish v. Warden, Marion Correctional Institution
Petitioner: William A. Parrish , Jr.
Respondent: Warden, Marion Correctional Institution
Case Number: 3:2016cv00486
Filed: November 28, 2016
Court: US District Court for the Southern District of Ohio
Office: Dayton Office
County: MONTGOMERY
Presiding Judge: Michael R. Merz
Presiding Judge: Walter H. Rice
Nature of Suit: General
Cause of Action: 28:1651
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
July 8, 2020 Opinion or Order Filing 78 CLERK'S JUDGMENT. Signed on 7/8/2020. (kma)(This document has been sent by regular mail to the party(ies) listed in the NEF that did not receive electronic notification.)
December 31, 2018 Opinion or Order Filing 71 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS ON MOTION TO CORRECT THE JUDGMENT 70 - Based on the foregoing analysis, the Motion to Correct the Judgment should be denied.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 and therefore should not be permitted to proceed in forma pauperis. Objections to R&R due by 1/14/2019. Signed by Magistrate Judge Michael R. Merz on 12/31/18. (kma)(This document has been sent by regular mail to the party(ies) listed in the NEF that did not receive electronic notification.)
December 5, 2018 Opinion or Order Filing 67 AMENDED ORDER ADOPTING SUPPLEMENT AL REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS for 60 Report and Recommendations - Accordingly, it is ORDERED that Petitioner's Motion for Relief from Judgment (ECF No. 58 ) is DENIED. Because reasonable jurists would not d isagree 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 and therefore should not be permitted to proceed in forma pauperis. Signed by Judge Walter H. Rice on 12/5/18. (pb)(This document has been sent by regular mail to the party(ies) listed in the NEF that did not receive electronic notification.)
December 4, 2018 Opinion or Order Filing 66 ORDER ADOPTING SUPPLEMENT AL REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS- The Court has reviewed the Supplemental Report and Recommendations of United States Magistrate Judge Michael R. Merz (ECF No. 65 ), to whom this case was referred pursuant to 28U.S.C. § 6 36(b), and noting that no objections have been filed thereto and that the time for filing such objections under Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b) has expired, hereby ADOPTS said Supplemental Report and Recommendations. Accordingly, it is ORDERED that Petitioner& #039;s Motion for Relief from Judgment (ECF No. 58 ) is DENIED. The Court certifies to the Sixth Circuit that any appeal would be objectively frivolous and therefore should not be permitted to proceed informa pauperis.. Signed by Judge Walter H. Rice on 12/4/18. (kma)(This document has been sent by regular mail to the party(ies) listed in the NEF that did not receive electronic notification.)
November 9, 2018 Opinion or Order Filing 65 SUPPLEMENTAL REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS - Having reconsidered the Motion in light of the Objections, the Magistrate Judge again recommends the Motion be denied. Because reasonable jurists would not disagree with this conclusion, Petitioner should b e denied a certificate of appealability and the Court should certify to the Sixth Circuit that any appeal would be objectively frivolous and therefore should not be permitted to proceed in forma pauperis. Objections to R&R due by 11/23/2018. Signed by Magistrate Judge Michael R. Merz on 11/9/2018. (kpf)(This document has been sent by regular mail to the party(ies) listed in the NEF that did not receive electronic notification.)
September 27, 2018 Opinion or Order Filing 60 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS ON MOTION FOR RELIEFFROM JUDGMENT 58 - Parrish has submitted no new evidence of fraud, but merely reargues the point he previously made unsuccessfully in this Court and the Sixth Circuit. His Motion should therefo re be denied. 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 and there fore should not be permitted to proceed in forma pauperis. Objections to R&R due by 10/11/2018. Signed by Magistrate Judge Michael R. Merz on 9/27/2018. (kpf)(This document has been sent by regular mail to the party(ies) listed in the NEF that did not receive electronic notification.)
January 22, 2018 Opinion or Order Filing 50 ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS - The Court has reviewed the Report and Recommendations ofUnited States Magistrate Judge Michael R. Merz (ECF No. 47 ), to whom this case was referred pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b), andnoting that no o bjections have been filed thereto and that the time for filing such objections under Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b) has expired, hereby ADOPTS said Report and Recommendations. Accordingly, it is ORDERED that Petitioner is denied a certificate of appealability and the Court certifies to the Sixth Circuit that any appeal would be objectively frivolous and therefore should not be permitted to proceed informa pauperis. Signed by Judge Walter H. Rice on 1/22/18. (kma)(This document has been sent by regular mail to the party(ies) listed in the NEF that did not receive electronic notification.)
December 27, 2017 Opinion or Order Filing 47 ORDER TO THE CLERK; REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS ON CERTIFICATE OF APPEALABILITY AND REQUEST FOR LEAVE TO APPEAL IN FORMA PAUPERIS re 3 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus filed by William A. Parrish, Jr., 46 MOTION for Leave to Appeal in forma pauperis filed by William A. Parrish, Jr. The Clerk is ORDERED to amend the docket to reflect the proper title and to advise the Sixth Circuit accordingly. Objections to R&R due by 1/10/2018. Signed by Magistrate Judge Michael R. Merz on 12/27/17. (pb)(This document has been sent by regular mail to the party(ies) listed in the NEF that did not receive electronic notification.)
December 13, 2017 Opinion or Order Filing 45 ORDER ADOPTING SUPPLEMENTAL REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS - The Court has reviewed the Supplemental Report and Recommendations of United States Magistrate Judge Michael R. Merz (ECF No. 44), to whom this case was referred pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 63 6(b), and noting that no objections have been filed thereto and that the time for filing such objections under Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b) has expired, hereby ADOPTS said Supplemental Report and Recommendations. Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED that Pet itioner's Motion for Relief from Judgment pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 60 (ECF No. 39 ) is DENIED. Signed by Judge Walter H. Rice on 12/13/17. (pb)(This document has been sent by regular mail to the party(ies) listed in the NEF that did not receive electronic notification.)
November 21, 2017 Opinion or Order Filing 44 SUPPLEMENTAL REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS ONMOTION FOR RELIEF FROM JUDGMENT - Objections to R&R due by 12/5/2017. Signed by Magistrate Judge Michael R. Merz on 11/21/2017. (kpf)(This document has been sent by regular mail to the party(ies) listed in the NEF that did not receive electronic notification.)
October 10, 2017 Opinion or Order Filing 41 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS ON MOTION FOR RELIEF FROM JUDGMENT - it is respectfully recommended that Petitioner's Motion for Relief from Judgment pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 60 (ECF No. 39) be DENIED. Objections to R&R due by 10/24/2017. Signed by Magistrate Judge Michael R. Merz on 10/10/2017. (kpf)(This document has been sent by regular mail to the party(ies) listed in the NEF that did not receive electronic notification.)
September 5, 2017 Opinion or Order Filing 37 CLERK'S JUDGMENT. Signed on 9/5/17. (kma)(This document has been sent by regular mail to the party(ies) listed in the NEF that did not receive electronic notification.)
July 7, 2017 Opinion or Order Filing 35 SUPPLEMENTAL OPINION ON STRIKING OBJECTIONS - In sum, Mr. Parrish's Objections to the Order Striking his Objections are not well taken and should be overruled. However, should the District Judge decide to consider the Objections despite their untimeliness, the Magistrate Judge believes no further recommittal on the basis of those Objections would be useful to the Court as the issues are adequately considered in the Report. Signed by Magistrate Judge Michael R. Merz on 7/7/2017. (kpf)(This document has been sent by regular mail to the party(ies) listed in the NEF that did not receive electronic notification.)
May 23, 2017 Opinion or Order Filing 30 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS - The Magistrate Judge respectfully recommends that the Petition herein be dismissed with prejudice because all claims are procedurally defaulted. Because reasonable jurists would not disagree with this conclusion, Peti tioner should be denied a certificate of appealability and the Court should certify to the Sixth Circuit that any appeal would be objectively frivolous and therefore should not be permitted to proceed in forma pauperis. Objections to R&R due by 6/6/2017. Signed by Magistrate Judge Michael R. Merz on 5/23/2017. (kpf)(This document has been sent by regular mail to the party(ies) listed in the NEF that did not receive electronic notification.)
May 4, 2017 Opinion or Order Filing 28 RECOMMITAL ORDER - This case is before the Court on Petitioner's Objections (ECF No. 26 ) to the Magistrate Judge's Decision and Order (ECF No. 24 ). The District Judge has preliminarily considered the Objections and believes they will be more appropriately resolved after further analysis by the Magistrate Judge. Accordingly. pmsuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(3), this matter is hereby returned to the Magi strate Judge with instructions to file a supplemental opi nion analyzing the Objections and making recommendations based on that analysis. Signed by Judge Walter H. Rice on 5/4/2017. (srb)(This document has been sent by regular mail to the party(ies) listed in the NEF that did not receive electronic notification.)
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 Southern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Parrish v. Warden, Marion 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: William A. Parrish , Jr.
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, Marion Correctional Institution
Represented By: M Scott Criss
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.


Why Is My Information Online?