Brunzswick Jones v. Henderson Cty Sheriff's Office, et al
| HENDERSON COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE, BEDENFEILD, BOTIE HILLHOUSE and OFFICER BRAD BEDDINGFIELD |
| BRUNZSWICK JONES |
| 19-40961 |
| November 19, 2019 |
| U.S. Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit |
| Other |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on December 19, 2019. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| CASE CAPTION updated. Involvement terminated for Appellee Bedenfeild in 19-40961. Reason: DC docket was incorrect. Amended complaint dated 3/18/19, page 3, changed the name of party and DC did not update their docket., Appellee Brad Beddingfield added to case. Reason: Name corrected in amended complaint. [19-40961] (AS) [Entered: 12/19/2019 03:51 PM] |
| DOCUMENT RECEIVED - NO ACTION TAKEN. No action will be taken on the appellant's letter regarding a correction of the party Brad Beddingfiled received from Appellant Mr. Brunzswick Jones because we have amended the case caption to include the correct spellling of appellee's name [19-40961] (DLM) [Entered: 12/20/2019 08:18 AM] |
| DOCUMENT RECEIVED - NO ACTION TAKEN. No action will be taken on the Application for COA with Brief in Support received from Appellant Mr. Brunzswick Jones because a COA will not be required in this appeal. [19-40961] (DLM) [Entered: 12/02/2019 01:53 PM] |
| INITIAL CASE CHECK by Attorney Advisor complete, Action: Review after Fee Issue is Resolved (PLRA case). [9197077-2] Initial AA Check Due satisfied. (IFPPDC) [19-40961] (ABT) [Entered: 11/25/2019 11:22 AM] |
| PRISONER CASE WITHOUT COUNSEL docketed. NOA filed by Appellant Mr. Brunzswick Jones [19-40961] (AS) [Entered: 11/19/2019 09:17 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.
