Jacobs v. Russell, et al, No. 4:1994cv01910 - Document 103 (N.D. Ohio 2010)

Court Description: Memorandum of Opinion and Order denying Motions 95 , 97 and 102 . Supplemental filings 96 & 98 are moot. Judge Lesley Wells(C,KA)

Download PDF
Jacobs v. Russell, et al Doc. 103 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO EASTERN DIVISION -----------------------------------------------------PHILLIP DOUGLAS JACOBS, Petitioner, -vsHARRY RUSSELL, Warden, Respondent. ------------------------------------------------------ : : CASE NO. 5:94 CV 1910 : : : : MEMORANDUM OF OPINION AND : ORDER : : : : UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE LESLEY WELLS Before the Court are the following submissions from the Petitioner: Motion to Vacate Void Judgment “ex parte” in Consolidation with Mandatory Judicial Notice”; (Doc. 95); Supplement Case Law and Authority to Motion to Vacate (Doc. 96); “Amended Motion to vacate with Incorporating by Reference Here – with Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus – with Amended Grounds for Relief and Immediate Request for Hearing for Resolution”; (Doc. 97); “Notice of Submission of Document Evidence;” (Doc. 98); “Motion for Leave to File a More Definite Statement”; (Doc. 102). The Court construes these filings as challenges to this Court’s order issued 29 August 2001 (Doc. 87), fully considering and denying Mr. Jacobs’ petition for writ of habeas corpus. In the interim, the Petitioner has exhibited a history of iterative, and untimely, challenges (Doc. 93, 94) to this Court’s determination nearly nine years ago. Dockets.Justia.com Mr. Jacobs’ current efforts at resuscitating his habeas claim is untimely and bears no indication of excusable neglect or good cause for the untimely filings. Accordingly, the Court will deny Mr. Jacobs’ motions (Docs. 95, 97, 102) and declare moot his supplemental filings (Docs. 96, 98). IT IS SO ORDERED. /s/Lesley Wells UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE Date: 9 June 2010 2

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.