Saylor v. Wooten

Filing 37

ORDER - The Motion for Extension of Time to Submit Amended Habeas Petition (Filing No. 36 ) is granted. A second amended petition shall be submitted no later than December 11, 2018. Petitioner's Motion Requesting Time to Engage New Counsel and Prepare Second Amended Petition (Filing No. 32 ) is denied as moot. Ordered by Magistrate Judge Susan M. Bazis. (KLF)

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEBRASKA JAMES M. SAYLOR, Petitioner, 8:17CV442 vs. ORDER JEFF WOOTEN, Respondent. This matter is before the Court on Petitioner’s Motion for Extension of Time to Submit Amended Habeas Petition. (Filing No. 36.) After numerous extensions of time, Petitioner, with the assistance of counsel, filed an amended habeas petition on July 30, 2018. (Filing No. 25.) Petitioner subsequently filed a motion requesting time to prepare a second amended petition. (Filing No. 27.) This request was denied on August 6, 2018 because Petitioner had not shown good cause to amend. (Filing No. 28.) Petitioner’s counsel was granted leave to withdraw on September 4, 2018. (Filing No. 30.) Petitioner has now retained substitute counsel. Current counsel has requested time to familiarize himself with the case and submit a second amended petition. Given counsel’s recent appearance, this request will be granted for good cause shown. However, counsel is advised that no further extensions of time will be granted. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED: 1. The Motion for Extension of Time to Submit Amended Habeas Petition (Filing No. 36) is granted. A second amended petition shall be submitted no later than December 11, 2018. 2. Petitioner’s Motion Requesting Time to Engage New Counsel and Prepare Second Amended Petition (Filing No. 32) is denied as moot. Dated this 1st day of October, 2018. BY THE COURT: s/ Susan M. Bazis United States Magistrate Judge 2

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?