Darryl Hudson, et al v. Don Davis, et al
| DARRYL HUDSON and LORENZO HUDSON |
| DON DAVIS and C. MARK ERWIN |
| 26-11676 |
| May 13, 2026 |
| U.S. Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit |
| Other Civil Rights |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on June 30, 2026. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 4
ORDER: Pursuant to the 11th Cir. R. 42-2(c), this appeal is hereby DISMISSED for want of prosecution because the appellant Darryl Hudson has failed to file an appellant's brief within the time fixed by the rules [Entered: 06/30/2026 03:09 PM]
|
| Filing 3 NOTICE OF CERTIFICATE OF INTERESTED PERSONS (CIP) DEFICIENCY issued to Darryl Hudson and Lorenzo Hudson. You have failed to file the CIP. 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: 06/16/2026 02:02 PM] |
| Filing 2 Briefing Notice issued to Appellants Darryl Hudson and Lorenzo Hudson. The appellant's brief is due on or before 06/22/2026. The appendix is due no later than 7 days from the filing of the appellant's brief. [Entered: 05/15/2026 03:27 PM] |
| Filing 1 CIVIL APPEAL DOCKETED. Notice of appeal filed by Appellants Darryl Hudson and Lorenzo Hudson on 05/13/2026. Fee Status: Fee Paid. See attached docketing notice for important information, including deadlines. [Entered: 05/15/2026 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.
