Legal Opinion
Wilkerson v. Jones
District Court, E.D. Michigan
Decided July 19, 2002No. CIV. 02-40063PublishedCited by 13 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION AND ORDER
GADOLA, District Judge.
Before the Court is Respondent’s motion to enlarge response time [docket entry 5]. Pursuant to Local Rule 7.1(e), the Court concludes that a hearing would not aid in the disposition of this motion. For the reasons set forth below, the Court shall deny Respondent’s motion and shall consider the habeas petition without reference to any untimely pleading that Respondent may file.
I BACKGROUND
Petitioner is a prisoner in a state prison. Respondent is the warden of that prison, and is represented by Assistant Attorney General Brenda E. Turner. On March 28,…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Pioneer Investment Services Co. v. Brunswick Associates Ltd. PartnershipSupreme Court of the United States · 1993
- Harris v. NelsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1969
- Clarissa Marsh v. Gloria RichardsonCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1989
- Robert C. Bleitner v. George C. Welborn and Attorney General of the State of IllinoisCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1994
- David Raymond v. International Business MacHines Corp.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1998
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by13 opinions
- Mahaday v. CasonDistrict Court, E.D. Michigan · 2002
- Rockwell Automation, Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Court of International Trade · 2014
- Doral Bank v. Citibank N.A.District Court, D. Puerto Rico · 2014
- Brent Alan Owings v. Adam DouglasDistrict Court, E.D. Michigan · 2026
- Dansby v. MaCauleyDistrict Court, E.D. Michigan · 2025
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.