Greenidge v. Carter
| Kevin Greenidge |
| Bob Eugene Guess, Philip Michael Carter and Richard Gregory Tilford |
| 24-10535 |
| June 14, 2024 |
| U.S. Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit |
| Other Contract Actions |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on July 22, 2024. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 11 EXTENSION RECEIVED for Appellant Mr. Kevin Greenidge. Extension Granted to and including 09/05/2024. A/Pet's Brief deadline updated to 09/05/2024 for Appellant Kevin Greenidge [24-10535] (LEF) [Entered: 07/22/2024 03:25 PM] |
| Filing 10 LEVEL 1 EXTENSION REQUESTED by Appellant Mr. Kevin Greenidge for filing Appellant's Brief until 09/05/2024 [24-10535] (Robert D. Loventhal ) [Entered: 07/22/2024 11:42 AM] |
| Filing 9 BRIEFING NOTICE ISSUED A/Pet's Brief Due on 08/14/2024 for Appellant Kevin Greenidge. [24-10535] (DDL) [Entered: 07/05/2024 03:15 PM] |
| Filing 8 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. [24-10535] (DDL) [Entered: 07/05/2024 03:14 PM] |
| Filing 7 ELECTRONIC RECORD ON APPEAL REQUESTED from District Court for 3:21-CV-1868. Electronic ROA due on 07/03/2024. [24-10535] (MVM) [Entered: 06/18/2024 02:57 PM] |
| Filing 6 INITIAL CASE CHECK by Attorney Advisor complete. Action: Case OK to Process. [6] Initial AA Check Due satisfied. [24-10535] (MVM) [Entered: 06/18/2024 02:54 PM] |
| Filing 1 PRIVATE CIVIL DIVERSITY CASE docketed. NOA filed by Appellant Mr. Kevin Greenidge [24-10535] (RSM) [Entered: 06/14/2024 08:39 AM] |
Access additional case information on PACER
Access the Case Summary and Docket Report to access additional information about this case on the U.S. 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.
