Willie Deriso v. Bobby Sapp, et al
| WILLIE LEE DERISO |
| FERRELL SOLES, BOBBY SAPP and RONDA CARTER |
| 19-11860 |
| May 13, 2019 |
| U.S. Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit |
| Other |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on June 13, 2019. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| APPEARANCE of Counsel Form filed by Thomas Michael Burke, Jr. for Doctor Ferrell Soles. [19-11860] (ECF: Thomas Burke) [Entered: 06/13/2019 02:59 PM] |
| Notice of deficient Certificate of Interested Persons filed by Thomas Michael Burke, Jr. for Doctor Ferrell Soles. Appearance of counsel form has not been filed in this appeal for Thomas Michael Burke, Jr. Please file appearance of counsel form in order for CIP to be accepted. [Entered: 06/13/2019 09:22 AM] |
| Certificate of Interested Persons and Corporate Disclosure Statement filed by T. Michael Burke, Jr., Attorney for Ferrell Soles, NP Attorney Thomas Michael Burke, Jr. for Appellee Doctor Ferrell Soles. On the same day the CIP is served, the party filing it must also complete the court's web-based stock ticker symbol certificate at the link here http://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/web-based-cip or on the court's website. See 11th Cir. R. 26.1-2(b). [19-11860] (ECF: Thomas Burke) [Entered: 06/12/2019 03:37 PM] |
| NOTICE OF CIP FILING DEFICIENCY to Thomas Michael Burke, Jr. for Doctor Ferrell Soles. You are receiving this notice because you have not completed the Web-Based Stock Ticker Symbol CIP via the court's public web-page and have not filed the CIP via the electronic filing system (CM/ECF). Failure to comply with 11th Cir. Rules 26.1-1 through 26.1-4 may result in dismissal of the case or appeal under 11th Cir. R. 42-1(b), return of deficient documents without action, or other sanctions on counsel, the party, or both. [Entered: 06/11/2019 08:56 AM] |
| Corrected Motion [ # 8795371-2 ] filed by Appellees Ronda Carter and Bobby Sapp. [19-11860] (ECF: Michael Sewell) [Entered: 06/11/2019 09:06 AM] |
| Notice of deficient Motion filed by Raleigh W. Rollins for Bobby Sapp and Ronda Carter and Michael Clay Sewell, Jr. for Bobby Sapp and Ronda Carter. Document does not contain a Certificate of Compliance, see FRAP 32(g)(1) Counsel must file a corrected motion using the Amend, Correct or Supplement Motion event within 3 days. [Entered: 06/10/2019 12:16 PM] |
| MOTION to dismiss appeal for lack of appellate jurisdiction filed by Ronda Carter and Bobby Sapp. Opposition to Motion is Unknown. [8795371-1] [19-11860] (ECF: Michael Sewell) [Entered: 06/10/2019 11:45 AM] |
| Public Communication: Letter from Pro Se Appellant requesting a copy of the court of appeals rules, regulations, guidelines, and procedures. [Entered: 05/23/2019 02:53 PM] |
| Appellant's Certificate of Interested Persons and Corporate Disclosure Statement filed by Appellant Willie Lee Deriso. [Entered: 05/23/2019 03:04 PM] |
| Certificate of Interested Persons and Corporate Disclosure Statement filed by Attorney Michael Clay Sewell, Jr. for Appellees Ronda Carter and Bobby Sapp. On the same day the CIP is served, the party filing it must also complete the court's web-based stock ticker symbol certificate at the link here http://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/web-based-cip or on the court's website. See 11th Cir. R. 26.1-2(b). [19-11860] (ECF: Michael Sewell) [Entered: 05/23/2019 04:00 PM] |
| APPEARANCE of Counsel Form filed by Raleigh W. Rollins for Ronda Carter and Bobby Sapp and Michael Clay Sewell, Jr. for Ronda Carter and Bobby Sapp. [19-11860] (ECF: Raleigh Rollins) [Entered: 05/21/2019 02:13 PM] |
| PRISONER (PLRA) APPEAL DOCKETED. Notice of appeal filed by Appellant Willie Lee Deriso on 05/13/2019. Fee Status: Fee Not Paid. No hearings to be transcribed. [Entered: 05/15/2019 09:32 AM] |
Access additional case information on PACER
Access the Case Summary and Docket Report to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
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.
