Legal Opinion
Smith v. Liller
District Court, N.D. West Virginia
Decided March 23, 2004No. CIV.A. 2:97CV87PublishedCited by 1 opinion
1Opinion of the Court
ORDER
MAXWELL, District Judge.
It will be remembered that the petitioner, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, seeks to pursue his remedies in this habe-as corpus action pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. 1 By Order entered January 13, 1998, the Court provided the Respondents with sixty (60) days in which to answer the petition and to show cause why the petition should not be granted. On March 16, 1998, the Respondents filed their Answer and Response to Order to Show Cause with the Court.
It will further be remembered that by Order entered March 19, 1998, the Petitioner was provided with notice of an…
2Cases cited19 opinions
- Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, Administratrix of the Estate of CatrettSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Adickes v. S. H. Kress & Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1970
- Williams v. TaylorSupreme Court of the United States · 2000
- Picard v. ConnorSupreme Court of the United States · 1971
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by1 opinion
- Cooper v. MirandyDistrict Court, N.D. West Virginia · 2018