Chiquita Marshall v. Columbus Consolidated Government, et al
| CHIQUITA MARSHALL, as next friend of ZR |
| COLUMBUS CONSOLIDATED GOVERNMENT, JANET MARSHALL, JOHN AND OR JANE DOES, 1-10, JOHNNY BONNER, MD, MICHEL DAHNKE, TANNER MEDICAL CENTER, INC., RASHANDA LAWRENCE, MS, VICKIE ROYAL, WYNTER BONNER and THE MEDICAL CENTER INC, d.b.a. Midtown Medical Center d.b.a. Piedmont Columbus Regional Midtown |
| 26-12417 |
| July 10, 2026 |
| U.S. Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit |
| Other Civil Rights |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on July 13, 2026. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 3 Briefing Notice issued to Appellant Chiquita Marshall. The appellant's brief is due on or before 08/19/2026. The appendix is due no later than 7 days from the filing of the appellant's brief. [Entered: 07/13/2026 10:10 AM] |
| Filing 2 NOTICE TO PARTIES: Due to the large number of parties associated with this appeal, not all parties from the district court docket have been entered on this Court's docket at this time. The parties may consult the relevant notice(s) of appeal, other case documents, and the district court docket to identify all parties. If any party objects to not having all parties listed on the docket, the party may file an objection stating its reasoning within 14 days after the date of this notice. [Entered: 07/13/2026 10:08 AM] |
| Filing 1 CIVIL APPEAL DOCKETED. Notice of appeal filed by Appellant Chiquita Marshall on 07/09/2026. Fee Status: Fee Paid. See attached docketing notice for important information, including deadlines. [Entered: 07/13/2026 10:06 AM] |
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.
