Waddy v. Coyle, et al

Filing 187

RECOMMITTAL ORDER: This capital habeas corpus case is before the Court on Respondent's Objections (Doc. No. 184 ) to the Magistrate Judges Decision and Order (Doc. No. 182 ). As permitted by Fed. R. Civ. P. 72, the Petitioner has filed a Resp onse to those Objections (Doc. No. 185 ). The District Judge has preliminarily considered the Objections and believes they will be more appropriately resolved after further analysis by the Magistrate Judge. Accordingly, pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 7 2(b)(3), this matter is hereby returned to the Magistrate Judge with instructions to file a supplemental opinion analyzing the Objections and Response and making recommendations based on that analysis. Signed by Judge Timothy S. Black on 6/12/12. (mr1)

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO WESTERN DIVISION AT DAYTON WARREN WADDY, : Case No. 3:98-cv-84 Petitioner, -vs- District Judge Timothy S. Black Magistrate Judge Michael R. Merz RALPH COYLE, WARDEN, Respondent. : RECOMMITTAL ORDER This capital habeas corpus case is before the Court on Respondent=s Objections (Doc. No. 184) to the Magistrate Judge’s Decision and Order (Doc. No. 182). As permitted by Fed. R. Civ. P. 72, the Petitioner has filed a Response to those Objections (Doc. No. 185). The District Judge has preliminarily considered the Objections and believes they will be more appropriately resolved after further analysis by the Magistrate Judge. Accordingly, pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(3), this matter is hereby returned to the Magistrate Judge with instructions to file a supplemental opinion analyzing the Objections and Response and making recommendations based on that analysis. June 12, 2012. _s/ Timothy S. Black___________ Timothy S. Black United States District Judge

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?