Thurman Kirkwood v. Christopher Epps
| Thurman Kirkwood |
| Christopher Epps, Ron King, Johnnie Denmark, warden and Hubert Davis, warden |
| 11-60831 |
| December 6, 2011 |
| U.S. Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit |
| Other |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on March 16, 2012. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| CLERK ORDER dismissing appeal pursuant to 5th Circuit Rule 42 for failure to pay fee [7040792-2] [11-60831] (DDL) [Entered: 03/16/2012 12:30 PM] |
| DISTRICT COURT ORDER of 02/07/2012 denying IFP for Appellant Mr. Thurman Kirkwood because appeal is not taken in good faith - fee assessed - BAUGH case. Awaiting District Court Action deadline satisfied. Fee or motion for IFP due on 03/09/2012 for Appellant Thurman Kirkwood [11-60831] (ABT) [Entered: 02/08/2012 07:52 AM] |
| FORWARDING FINANCIAL INFORMATION REGARDING MOTION for IFP received from Appellant Mr. Thurman Kirkwood to the District Court for filing.Awaiting District Court Action deadline updated to 02/07/2012 [11-60831] (MRW) [Entered: 01/25/2012 10:12 AM] |
| DISTRICT COURT NOTICE - IFP pending for Appellant Mr. Thurman Kirkwood. Awaiting District Court Action deadline updated to 01/30/2012 [11-60831] (ABT) [Entered: 12/29/2011 09:14 AM] |
| INITIAL CASE CHECK by Attorney Advisor complete, Action: Case OK to Process. [6970158-2] Initial AA Check Due satisfied. Awaiting DC Action due on 12/28/2011. (Motion for IFP pending in District Court) [11-60831] (MLL) [Entered: 12/12/2011 03:22 PM] |
| PRISONER CASE WITHOUT COUNSEL docketed. NOA filed by Appellant Mr. Thurman Kirkwood. [11-60831] (MLL) [Entered: 12/06/2011 04:39 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.
