From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Raisbeck v. Stewart

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION
Mar 1, 2017
CASE NO. 2:16-CV-13754 (E.D. Mich. Mar. 1, 2017)

Opinion

CASE NO. 2:16-CV-13754

03-01-2017

TONYA RAISBECK, Petitioner, v. ANTHONY STEWART, Respondent.


ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT

Michigan parolee Tonya Raisbeck ("Petitioner") has filed a pro se petition for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 challenging her state court convictions. Respondent has filed an answer to the petition and Petitioner has recently filed a reply to that answer. The matter is now before the Court on Petitioner's motion for partial summary judgment in which she asserts that Respondent has admitted to certain facts relevant to her habeas claims such that there is no issue of material fact and the state court's denial of relief on her claims is unreasonable.

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 56(c) provides that summary judgment is proper:

If the pleadings, depositions, answers to interrogatories and admissions on file, together with affidavits, if any, show that there
is no genuine issue as to any material fact and that the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.
Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(c). Although the parties' pleadings and the state court record have been filed in this case, the Court has yet to consider those materials in detail. Based upon an initial review of the record, however, the Court cannot conclude that there is no genuine issue of material fact and/or that Petitioner is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. As such, summary judgment is inappropriate. Moreover, the Court does not resolve habeas cases in a piecemeal fashion. The Court will address the merits of the case in a forthcoming opinion. Accordingly, the Court DENIES Petitioner's motion for partial summary judgment.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

S/Denise Page Hood

Denise Page Hood

Chief Judge, United States District Court Dated: March 1, 2017 I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing document was served upon counsel of record on March 1, 2017, by electronic and/or ordinary mail.

S/LaShawn R. Saulsberry

Case Manager


Summaries of

Raisbeck v. Stewart

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION
Mar 1, 2017
CASE NO. 2:16-CV-13754 (E.D. Mich. Mar. 1, 2017)
Case details for

Raisbeck v. Stewart

Case Details

Full title:TONYA RAISBECK, Petitioner, v. ANTHONY STEWART, Respondent.

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION

Date published: Mar 1, 2017

Citations

CASE NO. 2:16-CV-13754 (E.D. Mich. Mar. 1, 2017)