Roberts v. Wal-Mart Louisiana
| Sloane Roberts |
| Wal-Mart Louisiana, L.L.C., Jason Hebert, in his individual & official capacity, Jeffery Credeur, Sonny Stutes, individually & in his official capacity, Sammy Inzarrella, Jason Haines, Tony Hardy, Individually and Brannon Decou, Individually |
| 22-30067 |
| February 8, 2022 |
| U.S. Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit |
| Other Civil Rights |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on March 10, 2022. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| APPEARANCE FORM FILED by Attorney Jordan Henagan for Appellees Jason Hebert and Tony Hardy, in case 22-30067. [22-30067] (DLJ) [Entered: 03/10/2022 01:30 PM] |
| ELECTRONIC RECORD ON APPEAL FILED. Admitted Exhibits on File in District Court? No. Video/Audio Exhibits on File in District Court? No. Electronic ROA deadline satisfied. [22-30067] (SEP) [Entered: 03/09/2022 01:50 PM] |
| BRIEFING NOTICE ISSUED. A/Pet's Brief Due on 04/18/2022 for Appellant Sloane Roberts. [22-30067] (SEP) [Entered: 03/09/2022 01:50 PM] |
| APPEARANCE FORM for the court's review. Lead Counsel? No. [22-30067] (Jordan Henagan ) [Entered: 03/09/2022 03:47 PM] |
| TRANSCRIPT ORDER received advising transcript unnecessary for appeal purposes. Transcript Order ddl satisfied. [22-30067] REVIEWED AND/OR EDITED - The original text prior to review appeared as follows: TRANSCRIPT ORDER received from Appellant Ms. Sloane Roberts advising transcript unnecessary for appeal purposes. Date of Service: 02/25/2022, via email - Attorney for Appellees: Fontenot, Mansfield, Rabalais; Attorney for Appellant: Moses. [22-30067] (Edward Moses Jr.) [Entered: 02/25/2022 10:34 AM] |
| ELECTRONIC RECORD ON APPEAL REQUESTED from District Court for 6:15-CV-119. Electronic ROA due on 03/14/2022. [22-30067] (DLJ) [Entered: 02/25/2022 12:23 PM] |
| APPEARANCE FORM FILED by Attorney Edward Moses, Jr., for Appellant Sloane Roberts in 22-30067. [22-30067] (DLJ) [Entered: 02/25/2022 09:10 AM] |
| DOCUMENT RECEIVED - NO ACTION TAKEN. No action will be taken at this time on the Transcript Order Form received 02/24/2022, from Appellant Ms. Sloane Roberts, because the form must be signed and dated. Instructions to Attorney: PLEASE READ THE ATTACHED NOTICE FOR INSTRUCTIONS ON HOW TO REMEDY THE DEFAULT. Transcript order remains due on 03/02/2022, for Appellant Sloane Roberts. [22-30067] (DLJ) [Entered: 02/25/2022 09:30 AM] |
| APPEARANCE FORM received from Mr. Edward Moses, Jr., Esq. for Ms. Sloane Roberts for the court's review. Lead Counsel? Yes. [22-30067] (Edward Moses Jr.) [Entered: 02/24/2022 02:52 PM] |
| APPEARANCE FORM FILED by Attorney Joy C. Rabalais for Appellees Tony Hardy and Jason Hebert in 22-30067. [22-30067] (DLJ) [Entered: 02/23/2022 08:27 AM] |
| APPEARANCE FORM received from Ms. Joy C. Rabalais for Mr. Tony Hardy and Mr. Jason Hebert for the court's review. Lead Counsel? Yes. [22-30067] (Joy C. Rabalais ) [Entered: 02/18/2022 12:09 PM] |
| APPEARANCE FORM FILED by Attorney Philip Andre Fontenot, Sr., for Appellee Wal-Mart Louisiana, L.L.C. in 22-30067. [22-30067] (DLJ) [Entered: 02/17/2022 08:02 AM] |
| APPEARANCE FORM received from Mr. Philip Andre Fontenot, Sr. for Wal-Mart Louisiana, L.L.C. for the court's review. Lead Counsel? Yes. [22-30067] (Philip Andre Fontenot Sr.) [Entered: 02/16/2022 10:34 AM] |
| INITIAL CASE CHECK by Attorney Advisor complete. Action: Case OK to Process. [9777280-2] Initial AA Check Due satisfied. Transcript order due on 03/02/2022 for Appellant Sloane Roberts [22-30067] (MAS) [Entered: 02/15/2022 04:27 PM] |
| CIVIL RIGHTS CASE docketed. NOA filed by Appellant Ms. Sloane Roberts [22-30067] (MAS) [Entered: 02/08/2022 11:58 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.
