Freud v. New York City Department of Ed
| Abraham Freud |
| New York City Department of Education, Dorothy Collins, Individually and in her official capacity, Rudy E. Giuliani, Individually and in his official capacity and Marjorie Dalrymple, Individually and in her official capacity |
| 22-879 |
| April 22, 2022 |
| U.S. Court of Appeals, Second Circuit |
| CIVIL RIGHTS-Other |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on May 25, 2022. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 29 MOTION ORDER, granting motion to remove this case from the Courts Expedited Appeals Calendar and to set Appellant's opening brief due date as 08/03/2022, absent objection [ # 25 ] filed by Appellant Abraham Freud, by JAC, FILED. [3321392][29] [22-879] [Entered: 05/25/2022 03:26 PM] |
| Filing 25 MOTION, to extend time, on behalf of Appellant Abraham Freud, FILED. Service date 05/24/2022 by CM/ECF. [3320466] [22-879] [Entered: 05/24/2022 12:43 PM] |
| Filing 24 LOCAL RULE 31.2 NOTICE, placing this appeal on the Court's Expedited Calendar, setting appellant's brief due date as 06/21/2022, appellees' brief due date as 07/26/2022, TRANSMITTED.[3316770] [22-879] [Entered: 05/17/2022 03:58 PM] |
| Filing 23 NEW CASE MANAGER, Dana Ellwood, ASSIGNED.[3316756] [22-879] [Entered: 05/17/2022 03:49 PM] |
| Filing 20 ATTORNEY, Geoffrey Stannard, [ # 19 ], in place of attorney Sylvia Hinds-Radix, SUBSTITUTED.[3310780] [22-879] [Entered: 05/06/2022 01:58 PM] |
| Filing 19 NOTICE OF APPEARANCE AS SUBSTITUTE COUNSEL, on behalf of Appellee New York City Department of Education, Rudy E. Giuliani, Marjorie Dalrymple and Dorothy Collins, FILED. Service date 05/05/2022 by CM/ECF. [3310216] [22-879] [Entered: 05/05/2022 05:19 PM] |
| Filing 16 CURED DEFECTIVE LR 31.2 Scheduling Notification, [ # 12 ], on behalf of Appellant Abraham Freud, FILED.[3309764] [22-879] [Entered: 05/05/2022 11:34 AM] |
| Filing 15 DEFECTIVE DOCUMENT, LR 31.2 Scheduling Notification, [11], on behalf of Appellant Abraham Freud, FILED.[3309758] [22-879] [Entered: 05/05/2022 11:29 AM] |
| Filing 12 LR 31.2 SCHEDULING NOTIFICATION, on behalf of Appellant Abraham Freud, informing Court of proposed due date 08/03/2022, RECEIVED. Service date 05/04/2022 by CM/ECF.[3309074] [22-879] [Entered: 05/04/2022 02:34 PM] |
| Filing 11 LR 31.2 SCHEDULING NOTIFICATION, on behalf of Appellant Abraham Freud, informing Court of proposed due date 05/04/2022, RECEIVED. Service date 05/04/2022 by CM/ECF.[3309070] [22-879] [Entered: 05/04/2022 02:32 PM] |
| Filing 10 FORM C, on behalf of Appellant Abraham Freud, FILED. Service date 05/04/2022 by CM/ECF.[3309066] [22-879] [Entered: 05/04/2022 02:29 PM] |
| Filing 9 FORM D, on behalf of Appellant Abraham Freud, FILED. Service date 05/04/2022 by CM/ECF.[3309061] [22-879] [Entered: 05/04/2022 02:27 PM] |
| Filing 8 ACKNOWLEDGMENT AND NOTICE OF APPEARANCE, on behalf of Appellant Abraham Freud, FILED. Service date 05/04/2022 by CM/ECF.[3309058] [22-879] [Entered: 05/04/2022 02:26 PM] |
| Filing 5 ELECTRONIC INDEX, in lieu of record, FILED.[3302287] [22-879] [Entered: 04/22/2022 04:05 PM] |
| Filing 4 PAYMENT OF DOCKETING FEE, on behalf of Appellant Abraham Freud, district court receipt # ANYSDC-26044129, FILED.[3302286] [22-879] [Entered: 04/22/2022 04:04 PM] |
| Filing 3 DISTRICT COURT JUDGMENT, dated 03/25/2022, RECEIVED.[3302284] [22-879] [Entered: 04/22/2022 04:04 PM] |
| Filing 2 DISTRICT COURT OPINION AND ORDER, dated 03/25/2022, RECEIVED.[3302281] [22-879] [Entered: 04/22/2022 04:03 PM] |
| Filing 1 NOTICE OF CIVIL APPEAL, with district court docket, on behalf of Appellant Abraham Freud, FILED. [3302278] [22-879] [Entered: 04/22/2022 03:59 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.
