Simmons v. Taylor
| Tarina Shantayne Simmons |
| Sharon Taylor |
| 3:2013cv00436 |
| May 8, 2013 |
| U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Tennessee |
| Nashville Office |
| Davidson |
| Aleta A. Trauger |
| Habeas Corpus (General) |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State) |
| 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
43
ORDER: The petitioner is hereby GRANTED thirty (30) days from the date of entry of this order on the docket in which to submit to the Clerk of this Court either the full appellate filing fee of four hundred fifty five dollars ($455) or an application to proceed on appeal in forma pauperis. Signed by District Judge Aleta A. Trauger on 8/28/13. (xc:Pro se party by regular and certified mail; 6CCA via email)(DOCKET TEXT SUMMARY ONLY-ATTORNEYS MUST OPEN THE PDF AND READ THE ORDER.)(tmw)
|
|
Filing
39
ORDER: Accordingly, the Court finds no merit in the petitioner's Motion to Reconsider. Said Motion, therefore, is hereby DENIED. It is so ORDERED. Signed by District Judge Aleta A. Trauger on 8/16/13. (xc:Pro se party by regular and certified mail.)(DOCKET TEXT SUMMARY ONLY-ATTORNEYS MUST OPEN THE PDF AND READ THE ORDER.)(tmw)
|
|
Filing
32
ORDER: The Court finds that the petitioner has failed to make an adequate showing of entitlement to an equitable tolling of the limitation period. For that reason, the Court GRANTS the respondent's Motion for Relief from Order Denying the Mot ion to Dismiss. The order 17 denying the respondent's Motion to Dismiss is VACATED. Respondent's Motion to Dismiss the instant action as untimely is GRANTED and this action is hereby DISMISSED. Signed by District Judge Aleta A. Trauger on 7/24/13. (xc:Pro se party by regular and certified mail.)(DOCKET TEXT SUMMARY ONLY-ATTORNEYS MUST OPEN THE PDF AND READ THE ORDER.)(dt)
|
|
Filing
23
ORDER: The pro se petitioner is hereby GRANTED 30 days from the date of entry of this order on the docket in which to file whatever reply to the respondent's Rule 60(b)(1) Motion that she may deem appropriate. Signed by District Judge Aleta A. Trauger on 6/25/13. (xc:Pro se party by regular and certified mail.)(DOCKET TEXT SUMMARY ONLY-ATTORNEYS MUST OPEN THE PDF AND READ THE ORDER.)(dt)
|
|
Filing
16
MEMORANDUM. An appropriate order will be entered. Rule 8(a), Rules - - -§ 2254 Cases. Signed by District Judge Aleta A. Trauger on 6/14/13. (xc:Pro se party by regular and certified mail.)(DOCKET TEXT SUMMARY ONLY-ATTORNEYS MUST OPEN THE PDF AND READ THE ORDER.)(tmw)
|
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: Simmons v. Taylor | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Petitioner: Tarina Shantayne Simmons | |
| 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: Sharon Taylor | |
| Represented By: | Nicholas White Spangler |
| 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.
