Eugene McDuffie v. Warden
| WARDEN |
| EUGENE MCDUFFIE |
| 20-12394 |
| June 29, 2020 |
| U.S. Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit |
| Other |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on August 17, 2020. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| This APPELLANT has been notified that upon expiration of fourteen (14) days from this date, this appeal will be dismissed by the clerk without further notice unless the required filing fee has been received or a motion to proceed on appeal in forma pauperis is filed in this Court. The appellant is being served with this letter. [Entered: 08/17/2020 12:45 PM] |
| Certificate of Interested Persons and Corporate Disclosure Statement filed by Attorney Matthew Crowder for Appellee Warden. 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). [20-12394] (ECF: Matthew Crowder) [Entered: 07/31/2020 01:53 PM] |
| NOTICE OF CIP FILING DEFICIENCY to Christopher Michael Carr for Warden and Matthew Crowder for Warden. 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: 07/28/2020 09:32 AM] |
| Appellant's Certificate of Interested Persons and Corporate Disclosure Statement filed by Appellant Eugene McDuffie. [Entered: 07/20/2020 02:32 PM] |
| NOTICE OF CIP FILING DEFICIENCY to Eugene McDuffie. You are receiving this notice because you have not completed the Certificate of Interested Persons (CIP). 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: 07/14/2020 12:43 PM] |
| APPEARANCE of Counsel Form filed by Matthew B. Crowder for Appellee [20-12394] (ECF: Matthew Crowder) [Entered: 07/01/2020 09:40 AM] |
| USDC order denying COA and denying IFP as to Appellant Eugene McDuffie was filed on 05/26/2020. Docket Entry 17. [Entered: 06/30/2020 09:44 AM] |
| HABEAS APPEAL DOCKETED. Notice of appeal filed by Appellant Eugene McDuffie on 06/29/2020. Fee Status: Fee Not Paid. No hearings to be transcribed. [Entered: 06/30/2020 09:42 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.
| Search for this case: Eugene McDuffie v. Warden | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Respondent / appellee: WARDEN | |
| Represented By: | Matthew Crowder |
| Represented By: | Christopher Michael Carr |
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Finance | [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Petitioner / appellant: EUGENE MCDUFFIE | |
| Represented By: | Eugene McDuffie |
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Finance | [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
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.
