Day v. White
Lantz D. Day |
R. White |
1:2022cv00002 |
January 3, 2022 |
US District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia |
Ivan D Davis |
Michael S Nachmanoff |
Habeas Corpus (General) |
28 U.S.C. ยง 2254 |
None |
Docket Report
This docket was last retrieved on September 29, 2022. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
Document Text |
---|
Filing 12 RESPONSE to Motion re #7 MOTION to Dismiss with Roseboro,. filed by Lantz D. Day. (Attachments: #1 Attachment, #2 Cover Letter, #3 Envelope)(nneb) (Attachment 3 replaced on 2/24/2022) (nneb, ). |
Filing 11 Waiver of re #9 Brief in Support, #7 MOTION to Dismiss with Roseboro,., #8 Response to Habeas Petition Notice of Wavier of Oral Argument by R. White (Darron, Leah) |
Filing 10 Roseboro Notice by R. White (Darron, Leah) |
Filing 9 Brief in Support to #7 MOTION to Dismiss with Roseboro,., #8 Response to Habeas Petition filed by R. White. (Darron, Leah) |
Filing 8 Rule 5 Answer RESPONSE to Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus by R. White.(Darron, Leah) |
Filing 7 MOTION to Dismiss with Roseboro,. by R. White. (Darron, Leah) |
Filing 6 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF Receipt as to #4 Order of Prisoner Service (2254),, filed by R. White. (Darron, Leah) |
Filing 5 NOTICE of Appearance by Leah Ann Darron on behalf of R. White (Darron, Leah) |
Filing 4 ORDERED that the petition [Dkt. No. 1] be and is FILED; and it is further ORDERED that, within thirty (30) days of the date of this Order, respondent show cause why the writ should not be granted; and it is further ORDERED that if petitioner files a reply to respondents' responsive pleading, such reply shall be due no more than twenty-one (21) days after respondent files his responsive pleading (see Order for details). Signed by District Judge Michael S Nachmanoff on 1/6/2022. (dest) (c/s pursuant to Order) |
Filing 3 Case transferred in from District of Virginia Western; Case Number 7:21-cv-00636. Original file and docket sheet received. (Additional attachment(s) added on 1/3/2022: #2 Prisoner Data Report) (ldab, ). |
Filing 2 Order transferring case to USDC Eastern District of Virginia. Signed by Judge Elizabeth K. Dillon on 1/3/2022. (Order mailed to Pro Se Party via US Mail)(tvt) [Transferred from Virginia Western on 1/3/2022.] |
Notification of transfer of Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus from the Western District of VA Case No. 7:21cv636 to the Eastern District of Virginia. (ldab, ) |
Filing 1 PETITION for Writ of Habeas Corpus pursuant to 28 USC 2254, filed by Lantz D. Day.(slt) [Transferred from Virginia Western on 1/3/2022.] |
PAID-Filing Fee Received $ 5.00, receipt number 7-70378 (slt) [Transferred from Virginia Western on 1/3/2022.] |
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 Virginia Eastern 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: Day v. White | |
---|---|
Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
Petitioner: Lantz D. Day | |
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: R. White | |
Represented By: | Leah Ann Darron |
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.