Mauritz v. Lynn
| Nena Mauritz and Matthew Mauritz |
| Scott Lynn and Hattiesburg Clinic, P.A. |
| 22-60371 |
| July 5, 2022 |
| U.S. Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit |
| Jobs (Civil Rights) |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on August 22, 2022. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| APPELLANT'S BRIEF FILED. A/Pet's Brief deadline satisfied. Appellee's Brief due on 09/21/2022 for Appellees Hattiesburg Clinic, P.A. and Scott Lynn [22-60371] REVIEWED AND/OR EDITED - The original text prior to review appeared as follows: APPELLANT'S BRIEF FILED by Mr. Matthew Mauritz and Ms. Nena Mauritz. Date of service: 08/22/2022 via email - Attorney for Appellees: Adelman, Clark, Crutcher, Latino, Marsh; Attorney for Appellant: Waide [22-60371] (Daniel Myers Waide ) [Entered: 08/22/2022 05:05 PM] |
| RECORD EXCERPTS FILED. [22-60371] REVIEWED AND/OR EDITED - The original text prior to review appeared as follows: RECORD EXCERPTS FILED by Appellants Ms. Nena Mauritz and Mr. Matthew Mauritz. Date of service: 08/22/2022 via email - Attorney for Appellees: Adelman, Clark, Crutcher, Latino, Marsh; Attorney for Appellant: Waide [22-60371] (Daniel Myers Waide ) [Entered: 08/22/2022 04:09 PM] |
| APPEARANCE FORM FILED by Attorney(s) Anne Harlan Latino for party(s) Appellee Hattiesburg Clinic, P.A., in case 22-60371 [22-60371] (CB) [Entered: 07/20/2022 09:31 AM] |
| APPEARANCE FORM for the court's review. Lead Counsel? Yes. [22-60371] (Jason Thomas Marsh ) [Entered: 07/19/2022 11:30 AM] |
| APPEARANCE FORM FILED by Attorney Howard David Clark III for Appellee Scott Lynn in 22-60371 [22-60371] (AGL) [Entered: 07/19/2022 03:21 PM] |
| APPEARANCE FORM FILED by Attorney(s) Jason Thomas Marsh for party(s) Appellee Scott Lynn, in case 22-60371 [22-60371] (AGL) [Entered: 07/19/2022 03:23 PM] |
| APPEARANCE FORM for the court's review. Lead Counsel? No. [22-60371] (Anne Harlan Latino ) [Entered: 07/19/2022 04:41 PM] |
| APPEARANCE FORM received from Mr. Howard David Clark, III, Esq. for Mr. Scott Lynn for the court's review. Lead Counsel? No. [22-60371] (Howard David Clark III) [Entered: 07/19/2022 11:27 AM] |
| APPEARANCE FORM FILED by Attorney Robert Pepper Crutcher Jr. for Appellee Hattiesburg Clinic, P.A. in 22-60371 [22-60371] (AGL) [Entered: 07/14/2022 04:14 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. [22-60371] (AGL) [Entered: 07/13/2022 11:54 AM] |
| BRIEFING NOTICE ISSUED A/Pet's Brief Due on 08/22/2022 for Appellants Matthew Mauritz and Nena Mauritz. [22-60371] (AGL) [Entered: 07/13/2022 11:55 AM] |
| APPEARANCE FORM received from Mr. Robert Pepper Crutcher, Jr. for Hattiesburg Clinic, P.A. for the court's review. Lead Counsel? Yes. [22-60371] (Robert Pepper Crutcher Jr.) [Entered: 07/13/2022 02:23 PM] |
| APPEARANCE FORM received from Mr. Daniel Myers Waide, Esq. for Mr. Matthew Mauritz and Ms. Nena Mauritz for the court's review. Lead Counsel? Yes. [22-60371] (Daniel Myers Waide ) [Entered: 07/13/2022 03:23 PM] |
| APPEARANCE FORM FILED by Attorney Daniel Myers Waide for Appellant Matthew Mauritz in 22-60371, Attorney Daniel Myers Waide for Appellant Nena Mauritz in 22-60371 [22-60371] (WMJ) [Entered: 07/13/2022 04:40 PM] |
| INITIAL CASE CHECK by Attorney Advisor complete. Action: Case OK to Process. [9888684-2] Initial AA Check Due satisfied. [22-60371] (MCS) [Entered: 07/08/2022 03:44 PM] |
| ELECTRONIC RECORD ON APPEAL REQUESTED from District Court for 2:20-CV-184. Electronic ROA due on 07/25/2022. [22-60371] (MCS) [Entered: 07/08/2022 03:54 PM] |
| CIVIL RIGHTS CASE docketed. NOA filed by Appellants Mr. Matthew Mauritz and Ms. Nena Mauritz [22-60371] (MCS) [Entered: 07/05/2022 10:59 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.
