Conrad v. Holloway

Conrad v. Holloway

Defendant:	Bruce Westbrooks
Petitioner:	Justin B. Conrad
Case Number:	3:2017cv00270
Filed:	February 9, 2017
Court:	US District Court for the Middle District of Tennessee
Office:	Nashville Office
County:	Montgomery
Presiding Judge:	Aleta A. Trauger
Nature of Suit:	General
Cause of Action:	28 U.S.C. § 2254
Jury Demanded By:	None

Follow case documents by RSS

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:

Date Filed	Document Text
March 21, 2017	Filing 54 MEMORANDUM AND ORDER: The instant pro se § 2254 habeas corpus action was transferred (Docket Entry No. 50) to this Court on February 8, 2017 from the Western District of Tennessee. Prior to being transferred, the petitioner filed thirteen (13) motions in the case which remain pending today. These include three motions for the appointment of counsel (Docket Entry Nos. 23, 28 and 37), two motions for discovery and the production of documents (Docket Entry Nos. 24 and 36), a motion to comp ly (Docket Entry No. 29), five motions (Docket Entry Nos. 31, 33, 35, 39 and 47) to Incorporate Documented Evidence under State and Federal Law, a motion (Docket Entry No. 34) to compel counsel to surrender his case file, and a motion for change o f venue (Docket Entry No. 42). Finally, there is one pending motion (Docket Entry No. 52) that was filed after the case was transferred to this judicial district. Signed by District Judge Aleta A. Trauger on 3/21/2017. (xc:Pro se party by regular and certified mail.)(DOCKET TEXT SUMMARY ONLY-ATTORNEYS MUST OPEN THE PDF AND READ THE ORDER.)(eh)

Date Filed

Document Text

March 21, 2017

Filing 54 MEMORANDUM AND ORDER: The instant pro se § 2254 habeas corpus action was transferred (Docket Entry No. 50) to this Court on February 8, 2017 from the Western District of Tennessee. Prior to being transferred, the petitioner filed thirteen (13) motions in the case which remain pending today. These include three motions for the appointment of counsel (Docket Entry Nos. 23, 28 and 37), two motions for discovery and the production of documents (Docket Entry Nos. 24 and 36), a motion to comp ly (Docket Entry No. 29), five motions (Docket Entry Nos. 31, 33, 35, 39 and 47) to Incorporate Documented Evidence under State and Federal Law, a motion (Docket Entry No. 34) to compel counsel to surrender his case file, and a motion for change o f venue (Docket Entry No. 42). Finally, there is one pending motion (Docket Entry No. 52) that was filed after the case was transferred to this judicial district. Signed by District Judge Aleta A. Trauger on 3/21/2017. (xc:Pro se party by regular and certified mail.)(DOCKET TEXT SUMMARY ONLY-ATTORNEYS MUST OPEN THE PDF AND READ THE ORDER.)(eh)

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 Tennessee Middle District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Conrad v. Holloway
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]
Petitioner: Justin B. Conrad
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 ]
Defendant: Bruce Westbrooks
Represented By:	Richard Davison Douglas
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?