Pillow v. Frink
| Brian Pillow |
| Warden Martin Frink |
| 1:2021cv00066 |
| October 25, 2021 |
| U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Tennessee |
| William L Campbell |
| Habeas Corpus (General) |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 2254 |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on March 7, 2025. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 7
ORDER: Petitioner's application to proceed in forma pauperis #6 is GRANTED. Respondent is ORDERED to respond to Petitioner's equitable tolling argument within 30 days of entry of this Order. The Clerk is DIRECTED to serve a copy of the petition and this Order on Respondent and the Attorney General of Tennessee. See Habeas Rule 4. Signed by District Judge William L. Campbell, Jr on 12/3/2021. (xc: Pro se party by regular mail. Copy of Order and Petition forwarded to Respondent and TN Attorney General's office ) (DOCKET TEXT SUMMARY ONLY-ATTORNEYS MUST OPEN THE PDF AND READ THE ORDER.)(kc)
|
| Filing 6 APPLICATION for Leave to Proceed In Forma Pauperis by Brian Pillow. (ln) |
| TN State Bar status verified as active for Nicholas S. Bolduc admitted to this court. (ln) |
| Filing 5 NOTICE of Appearance by Nicholas S. Bolduc on behalf of Martin Frink (Bolduc, Nicholas) |
|
Filing 4
ORDER: This Court cannot consider the petition until Petitioner has either submitted the filing fee or has been granted leave to proceed without prepayment of fees and costs. Accordingly, the Clerk is DIRECTED to send Petitioner a blank short-form Application to Proceed in District Court without Prepaying Fees or Costs. Within 30 days from the date of entry of this Order on the docket, Petitioner MUST submit to the Court either the $5.00 filing fee or the completed application. Signed by District Judge William L. Campbell, Jr on 10/27/2021. (xc:Pro se party by regular mail along with a blank short-form Application to Proceed in District Court without Prepaying Fees or Costs.) (DOCKET TEXT SUMMARY ONLY-ATTORNEYS MUST OPEN THE PDF AND READ THE ORDER.)(ln)
|
| Filing 3 NOTICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE ORDER NO. 217 to parties re obligation of counsel to keep Court apprised of current contact information. (ln) |
| Filing 2 NOTICE/INFORMATION regarding Consent of the Parties to the Magistrate Judge. (ln) |
| Notice mailed to pro se party regarding filing of new case (docket sheet & certificate of service form and Notice of Consent form included). (ln) |
| Filing 1 PETITION for Writ of Habeas Corpus filed by Brian Pillow. (Attachments: #1 Attachment 1 - Cover Letter)(ln) |
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 Tennessee 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
| Search for this case: Pillow v. Frink | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Petitioner: Brian Pillow | |
| 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 Martin Frink | |
| Represented By: | Nicholas S. Bolduc |
| 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.
