Stevenson v. Grabowski et al
| Ray L Stevenson |
| John Doe #1, John Doe and Kyle Grabowski |
| 2:2019cv01322 |
| September 11, 2019 |
| US District Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin |
| Pamela Pepper |
| Habeas Corpus (General) |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 2254 |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on October 28, 2020. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 5 ADDENDUM by Ray L Stevenson re #1 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus. (lh) |
| FILING FEE Received: $5, receipt number GB4689005526. (lh) |
| Filing 4 MOTION for Leave to Proceed Without Prepayment of the Filing Fee by Ray L Stevenson. (mac) |
| Filing 3 Magistrate Judge Jurisdiction Form filed by Ray L Stevenson. (NOTICE: Pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 73 this document is not viewable by the judge.) (mac) |
| Filing 2 LETTER from the clerk to Ray L Stevenson re Consent/Refusal to Magistrate Judge Duffin and requesting that the consent/refusal form be filed within 21 days. Also requesting payment of the full filing fee or that a petition to proceed without prepayment of the full filing fee and six-month certified trust account statement be filed within 21 days. (lh) |
| Filing 1 PETITION for Writ of Habeas Corpus and Motion for Mandamus filed by Ray L Stevenson. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit, #2 Petitioner Mailing Address)(lh) Modified filing date on 9/12/2019 (lh). |
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 Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
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.
