Ivery v. Baldauf
| Ricky J. Harris, Jr., James M. Sheppard and City of Rochester |
| Dwayne Ivery |
| Alexander C. Baldauf |
| 21-1474 |
| June 11, 2021 |
| U.S. Court of Appeals, Second Circuit |
| Other |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on August 9, 2021. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 9 DISTRICT COURT ORDER, dated 07/12/2021, denying IFP, RECEIVED.[3152572] [21-1474] [Entered: 08/09/2021 10:51 AM] |
Filing 8
ORDER, dated 07/09/2021, dismissing appeal by 7/30/2021, unless Appellant Dwayne Ivery, submit an Acknowledgment and Notice of Appearance, copy to pro-se appellant, FILED.[3134397] [21-1474] [Entered: 07/09/2021 10:33 AM]
|
|
Filing 7
ORDER, dated 07/09/2021, dismissing appeal by 7/30/2021, unless Appellant Dwayne Ivery, submits Form D-P, copy to pro-se appellant, FILED.[3134368] [21-1474] [Entered: 07/09/2021 10:20 AM]
|
| Filing 6 NOTICE, re: pending district court IFP motion, to district court, SENT.[3129913] [21-1474] [Entered: 06/30/2021 03:54 PM] |
| Filing 5 INSTRUCTIONAL FORMS, to Pro Se litigant, SENT.[3120151] [21-1474] [Entered: 06/15/2021 07:21 AM] |
| Filing 4 ELECTRONIC INDEX, in lieu of record, FILED.[3120149] [21-1474] [Entered: 06/15/2021 07:19 AM] |
| Filing 3 DISTRICT COURT JUDGMENT, dated 05/28/2021, RECEIVED.[3120148] [21-1474] [Entered: 06/15/2021 07:17 AM] |
| Filing 2 DISTRICT COURT DECISION AND ORDER, dated 05/27/2021, RECEIVED.[3120146] [21-1474] [Entered: 06/15/2021 07:15 AM] |
| Filing 1 NOTICE OF CIVIL APPEAL, with district court docket, on behalf of Appellant Dwayne Ivery, FILED. [3120141] [21-1474] [Entered: 06/15/2021 07:04 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.
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.
