Janice Baker v. Resnick & Lewis, P.C., et al
| JANICE DENISE BAKER |
| RESNICK & LEWIS, P.C., MACY'S FLORIDA STORES, LLC, BRIAN L. HARVELL, ROBERT J. SQUIRRE, BRYAN BOYSAW and DAVE ROY |
| 22-13837 |
| November 14, 2022 |
| U.S. Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit |
| Other Contract Actions |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on December 30, 2022. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 7 MOTION to proceed IFP filed by Appellant Janice Denise Baker. Opposition to Motion is Unknown [7] [Entered: 12/30/2022 03:18 PM] |
| Filing 6 Notice of receipt: Copies of District Court Filings as to Appellant Janice Denise Baker.. [Entered: 12/30/2022 03:14 PM] |
| Filing 5 USDC order denying IFP as to Appellant Janice Denise Baker was filed on 12/05/2022. Docket Entry 20. [Entered: 12/08/2022 08:43 AM] |
| Filing 4 Notice of receipt: Transcript Order Form as to Appellant Janice Denise Baker. NO ACTION WILL BE TAKEN No hearings in the district court case on appeal. [Entered: 11/28/2022 01:04 PM] |
| Filing 3 Appellant's AMENDED Certificate of Interested Persons and Corporate Disclosure Statement filed by Appellant Janice Denise Baker. [Entered: 11/28/2022 01:02 PM] |
| Filing 2 Appellant's Certificate of Interested Persons and Corporate Disclosure Statement filed by Appellant Janice Denise Baker. [Entered: 11/17/2022 04:52 PM] |
| CIVIL APPEAL DOCKETED. Notice of appeal filed by Appellant Janice Denise Baker on 11/09/2022. Fee Status: IFP Pending. USDC motion pending: Motion for Leave to Appeal In Forma Pauperis, DE# 13. No hearings to be transcribed. [Entered: 11/17/2022 04:43 PM] |
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.
