Danley v. Addison

Respondent: Mike Addison
Petitioner: Travis Lee Danley
Case Number: 4:2013cv00074
Filed: February 4, 2013
Court: Oklahoma Northern District Court
Office: Tulsa Office
County: Cleveland
Referring Judge: Paul J Cleary
Presiding Judge: Claire V Eagan
Nature of Suit: Habeas Corpus (General)
Cause of Action: 28:2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
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
November 7, 2013 7 Opinion or Order of the Court OPINION AND ORDER by Judge Claire V Eagan that by November 28, 2013, Petitioner may file an amended petition containing only the exhausted claim and deleting the unexhausted claims; directing Clerk to send forms (Re: 1 PETITION for Writ of Habeas Corpus - 2254 ) (RGG, Chambers)

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 Oklahoma Northern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Danley v. Addison
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Respondent: Mike Addison
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 [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Petitioner: Travis Lee Danley
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 [ 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.