Victor v. Varano et al
| William Victor |
| David Varano and PA State Attorney General |
| 3:2011cv02000 |
| October 27, 2011 |
| US District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania |
| Scranton Office |
| Northumberland |
| Martin C. Carlson |
| William J. Nealon |
| 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
MEMORANDUM - order to follow. Signed by Honorable William J. Nealon on 7/8/2013. (rm)
|
|
Filing
33
MEMORANDUM ORDER - We will DENY Victors request to strike this response to his habeas corpus petition. We further find that, at present, theappointment of counsel is unnecessary to address these claims. We will DENY any request for discovery at thi s time but will set the following schedule for further proceedings in this case: 1. If Victor believes that he needs further material beyond the materials in his possession and those included in theRespondents response to this habeas corpus petition , he will file a narrowly tailored discovery motion on or before September 7, 2012. 2. The Respondents shall respond to any discovery motion by producing the requested materials or lodging appropriate objections, on or before September 21, 2012. 3. Petitioners traverse shall then be filed on or before October 19, 2012. Signed by Magistrate Judge Martin C. Carlson on August 22, 2012. (kjn )
|
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 Pennsylvania Middle 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
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.
