Hanson v. Clements
Petitioner: Daniel L Hanson
Respondent: Marc W Clements
Case Number: 2:2013cv01145
Filed: October 9, 2013
Court: US District Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin
Office: Milwaukee Office
County: Dodge
Presiding Judge: Lynn Adelman
Nature of Suit: General
Cause of Action: 28 U.S.C. ยง 2254
Jury Demanded By: None

Available Case Documents

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

Date Filed Document Text
March 20, 2015 Opinion or Order Filing 91 ORDER signed by Judge Lynn Adelman on 3/20/15 denying 87 Motion for Reconsideration. (cc: all counsel, via USPS to petitioner) (dm)
September 26, 2014 Opinion or Order Filing 58 DECISION AND ORDER signed by Judge Lynn Adelman on 9/26/14 granting 21 Motion to Dismiss. The Clerk of Court shall enter final judgment. I find that the petitioner has not made the showing required by 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2), and therefore I will not issue a certificate of appealability. Further ordering as follows: denying 41 Motion for Order; denying 42 Motion to Vacate ; denying 48 Motion for Default Judgment; denying 48 Motion for Contempt; denying 50 Motion for Hear ing; denying 56 Motion for Order; denying 57 Motion; denying 13 Motion for Judgment; denying 14 Motion for Discovery; denying 24 Motion for Hearing; denying 30 Motion for Discovery; denying 33 Motion, Motion for Order; denying 36 Motion to Amend/Correct; denying 38 Motion for Judgment; denying 40 Motion to Compel. (cc: all counsel, via USPS to petitioner) (dm)
February 6, 2014 Opinion or Order Filing 35 ORDER signed by Judge Lynn Adelman on 2/6/14 that petitioners requests to proceed in forma pauperis 9 , 28 are DENIED AS MOOT. Further ordering that petitioners motion to file joinder 2 and motion to consolidate cases 4 are DENIED. (cc: all counsel, via USPS to petitioner) (dm)
October 16, 2013 Opinion or Order Filing 6 ORDER signed by Judge Lynn Adelman on 10/16/13 that within thirty (30) days of the date of this order respondent ANSWER the petition, showing cause, if any, why the writ should not issue. Further ordering that unless respondent files a dispositive motion with its answer the parties shall abide by the briefing schedule set forth herein. (cc: all counsel, via USPS to petitioner)(dm)
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 Wisconsin Eastern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Hanson v. Clements
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Petitioner: Daniel L Hanson
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: Marc W Clements
Represented By: Sarah L Burgundy
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?