Marvin Long v. Max Dotson, et al
| MARVIN EUGENE LONG |
| MAX DOTSON, TOMMY MILLS, BRADLEY SKIPWORTH, BRETT EVANS and JAMES NICHOLAS RISNER |
| 26-11465 |
| April 29, 2026 |
| U.S. Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit |
| Other Civil Rights |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on May 28, 2026. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 18 Notice to Counsel of Record. Counsel of Record must be logged in to CM/ECF and Pacer to access this document. This is the only notice you will receive regarding this matter. Please print a copy for your file. [Entered: 05/28/2026 02:14 PM] |
| Filing 17 Over the phone 30-day extension granted by clerk as to Attorney Roderick Van Daniel for Appellant Marvin Eugene Long. Appellants brief due on 07/08/2026 as to Appellant Marvin Eugene Long. Appendix due seven (7) days after the Brief. Any request for a second or subsequent extension of time shall be subject to 11th Cir. R. 31-2(d). [Entered: 05/28/2026 01:56 PM] |
| Filing 16 Certificate of Interested Persons and Corporate Disclosure Statement filed by Attorney David J. Canupp for Appellee Max Dotson. On the same day the CIP is served, any filer represented by counsel 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. 26.1-1(b). [26-11465] (ECF: David Canupp) [Entered: 05/27/2026 09:28 AM] |
| Filing 15 Certificate of Interested Persons and Corporate Disclosure Statement filed by Attorney Robbie Alexander Hyde for Appellees Brett Evans and James Nicholas Risner. On the same day the CIP is served, any filer represented by counsel 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. 26.1-1(b). [26-11465] (ECF: Robbie Hyde) [Entered: 05/26/2026 05:43 PM] |
| Filing 14 Certificate of Interested Persons and Corporate Disclosure Statement filed by Attorney James Randall McNeill for Appellees Tommy Mills and Bradley Skipworth. On the same day the CIP is served, any filer represented by counsel 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. 26.1-1(b). [26-11465] (ECF: James McNeill) [Entered: 05/22/2026 02:40 PM] |
| Filing 13 Certificate of Interested Persons and Corporate Disclosure Statement filed by Attorney Roderick Van Daniel for Appellant Marvin Eugene Long. On the same day the CIP is served, any filer represented by counsel 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. 26.1-1(b). [26-11465] (ECF: Roderick Daniel) [Entered: 05/19/2026 01:12 PM] |
| Filing 12 NOTICE OF CERTIFICATE OF INTERESTED PERSONS (CIP) DEFICIENCY issued to Roderick Van Daniel for Marvin Eugene Long and Harry Daniels, Jr. for Marvin Eugene Long. You have failed to file the CIP and failed to complete the Web-Based CIP on the Court's website. If you are an appellant or petitioner, pursuant to 11th Cir. Rules 26.1-5(c) and 42-1(b), this appeal will be dismissed without further notice upon the expiration of 14 days from the date of this notice unless you remedy the default(s). If you are an appellee or respondent, pursuant to 11th Cir. R. 26.1-5(c), no action may be taken on your filings until you comply with the CIP rules. [Entered: 05/19/2026 08:57 AM] |
| Filing 11 Civil Appeal Statement filed by Attorney Roderick Van Daniel for Appellant Marvin Eugene Long. Related cases? No. [26-11465] (ECF: Roderick Daniel) [Entered: 05/18/2026 05:40 PM] |
| Filing 10 APPEARANCE of Counsel Form filed by Roderick Van Daniel for Marvin Eugene Long. Related cases? No. [26-11465] (ECF: Roderick Daniel) [Entered: 05/15/2026 10:09 PM] |
| Filing 9 APPEARANCE of Counsel Form filed by Jamie Helen Kidd Frawley for Tommy Mills and Bradley Skipworth. Related cases? No. [26-11465] (ECF: Jamie Frawley) [Entered: 05/12/2026 05:53 PM] |
| Filing 8 APPEARANCE of Counsel Form filed by James Randall McNeill for Tommy Mills and Bradley Skipworth. Related cases? No. [26-11465] (ECF: James McNeill) [Entered: 05/12/2026 05:39 PM] |
| Filing 7 APPEARANCE of Counsel Form filed by Max Dotson Allison B. Chandler for Max Dotson. Related cases? No. [26-11465] (ECF: Allison Chandler) [Entered: 05/12/2026 05:26 PM] |
| Filing 6 APPEARANCE of Counsel Form filed by Max Dotson David J. Canupp for Max Dotson. Related cases? No. [26-11465] (ECF: David Canupp) [Entered: 05/12/2026 05:25 PM] |
| Filing 5 APPEARANCE of Counsel Form filed by Bart Gregory Harmon for Brett Evans. Related cases? No. [26-11465] (ECF: Bart Harmon) [Entered: 05/08/2026 03:56 PM] |
| Filing 4 APPEARANCE of Counsel Form filed by Robbie Alexander Hyde for Brett Evans and James Nicholas Risner. Related cases? No. [26-11465] (ECF: Robbie Hyde) [Entered: 05/08/2026 03:54 PM] |
| Filing 3 Briefing Notice issued to Appellant Marvin Eugene Long. The appellant's brief is due on or before 06/08/2026. The appendix is due no later than 7 days from the filing of the appellant's brief. [Entered: 04/29/2026 02:54 PM] |
| Filing 2 TRANSCRIPT ORDER form filed by Attorney Roderick Van Daniel for Appellant Marvin Eugene Long. No transcript is required for appeal purposes. [Entered: 04/29/2026 02:50 PM] |
| Filing 1 CIVIL APPEAL DOCKETED. Notice of appeal filed by Appellant Marvin Eugene Long on 04/28/2026. Fee Status: Fee Paid. See attached docketing notice for important information, including deadlines. [Entered: 04/29/2026 02:48 PM] |
Access additional case information on PACER
Access the Case Summary and Docket Report to access additional information about this case on the U.S. 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.
