Perez-Merino v. City of Dallas
| Arlene Perez-Merino |
| Dallas County, Darius Edberson, Financial Crimes Detective, Ryan McCarit, Detective, Financial Crimes, Dashad Young, Sergeant, Mario X. Garcia, Sergeant, Dallas Police Department, Emanuel Paulos, Police Officer, Massail Sherwin, Police Officer, Nancy Jones, Sergeant, Dallas Internal Affairs, Stephanie McGee, Sergeant, Dallas Internal Affairs, Stephen Hoyer, Lieutenant, Dallas Internal Affairs, Nicholas Morris, Lieutenant, Dallas Internal Affairs, Anthony Greer, Senior Corporal, Dallas Internal Affairs, Eduardo Garcia, Chief of Police, City of Dallas, Christopher Ray Clark, Esq. Mediation Manager, Office of Community Police Oversight, Siara Montoya Obasuyi, Policy Analyst, Office of Community Police Oversight, John Creuzot, Dallas District Attorney, Jerry Varney, Assistant District Attorney, Family Violence Chief, Dallas Division 5, Ryan Searcey, Assistant District Attorney, Department Chief, Dallas Division 5, Amy Gossett, Victim Advocate, Family Violence Division, Dallas County District Attorney, Eric Johnson, Mayor, Alheli Garza, Assistant to the Mayor, Michele Andre, Director, Office of Community Policy Oversight, Irene Alanis, Major, Dallas Internal Affairs, Krista Varney, Chief Client Services Officer for The Family Place, Tracy A. Dreighton, HR Interim for The Family Place, Tiffany Tate-McDaniel, Interim CEO and COO, Tammy Jones, Sergeant, Dallas Internal Affairs, Russel Stephens, Senior Corporal Investigator, Joseph S. Kennard, Lieutenant, Dallas Police Department, Family Place, City of Dallas, Alyeah Miranda, Senior Director of Residential Services, for The Family Place, Randall W. Elmore, Vice President of Operations, for The Family Place and Alexis Anderson, Assistant Manager for The Family Place |
| 25-10375 |
| March 11, 2025 |
| U.S. Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit |
| Other Civil Rights |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on July 31, 2025. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 44 REDACTED MOTION filed by Appellant Ms. Arlene Perez-Merino to appoint counsel [44]. Date of service: 07/31/2025 [25-10375] (LEF) [Entered: 08/15/2025 01:52 PM] |
| Filing 42 PROPOSED SUFFICIENT BRIEF filed by Appellant Ms. Arlene Perez-Merino in 25-10375 [ # 34 ] Brief has been deemed sufficient. Sufficient Brief deadline satisfied [25-10375] (LEF) [Entered: 07/29/2025 03:06 PM] |
| Filing 39 COURT ORDER granting in part to place under seal motion for accomodations and to appoint counsel filed by Appellant Ms. Arlene Perez-Merino. It is further ordered that Perez-Merino is directed to file a redacted motion for accomodations and to appoint counsel on or before August 4, 2025. The only information that should be redacted is home addresses and the last four digits of social-security numbers, financial account numbers, and other personal account numbers. Confidential medical records may also be redacted. The un-redacted motion will remain on filed for the court's use. [ # 33 ] [25-10375] (LEF) [Entered: 07/22/2025 01:08 PM] |
| Filing 29 CASE CAPTION updated. Appellee Alexis Anderson added to case. Reason: in light of the court order granting the motion to amend the caption. [25-10375] (LEF) [Entered: 07/08/2025 08:35 AM] |
| Filing 28 CASE CAPTION updated. Party information modified for Randall W. Elmore and Alyeah Miranda in 25-10375. Update: in light of the court order granting the motion to amend the caption. [25-10375] (LEF) [Entered: 07/08/2025 08:32 AM] |
| Filing 27 CASE CAPTION updated. Appellee Dallas County in 25-10375 substituted by Appellee City of Dallas in 25-10375 [25-10375] (LEF) [Entered: 07/08/2025 08:27 AM] |
| Filing 26 COURT ORDER granting Motion to amend caption filed by Appellant Ms. Arlene Perez-Merino [ # 22 ] [25-10375] (LEF) [Entered: 07/08/2025 08:20 AM] |
| Filing 33 MOTION filed by Appellant Ms. Arlene Perez-Merino to place motion to appoint counsel under seal [33]. Date of service: 07/07/2025 [25-10375] (LEF) [Entered: 07/15/2025 02:01 PM] |
| Filing 34 SUFFICIENT APPELLANT'S BRIEF FILED by Ms. Arlene Perez-Merino. Additionally the Brief includes attached exhibits. Exhibits are not allowed and must be removed. Instructions to Attorney: PLEASE READ THE ATTACHED NOTICE FOR INSTRUCTIONS ON HOW TO REMEDY THE DEFAULT. # of Copies Provided: 0 A/Pet's Brief deadline satisfied. Sufficient Brief due on 07/29/2025 for Appellee Irene Alanis. [25-10375] (LEF) [Entered: 07/15/2025 02:18 PM] |
| Filing 32 MOTION filed by Appellant Ms. Arlene Perez-Merino to appoint counsel [32]. Date of service: 07/02/2025 [25-10375] (LEF) [Entered: 07/15/2025 01:53 PM] |
| Filing 22 MOTION filed by Appellant Ms. Arlene Perez-Merino to amend caption [22]. Date of service: 06/23/2025 [25-10375] (LEF) [Entered: 06/26/2025 11:03 AM] |
| Filing 21 DOCUMENT RECEIVED - NO ACTION TAKEN. No action will be taken at this time on the motion to supplement the record on appeal received from Appellant Ms. Arlene Perez-Merino because it is unnecessary. Multimedia files are part of the record on appeal but are designated with page numbers and Document #27 is also part of the record on appeal . [25-10375] (LEF) [Entered: 06/26/2025 10:12 AM] |
| Filing 20 BRIEFING NOTICE ISSUED A/Pet's Brief Due on 07/02/2025 for Appellant Arlene Perez-Merino. [25-10375] (DDL) [Entered: 05/23/2025 01:42 PM] |
| Filing 19 ELECTRONIC RECORD ON APPEAL FILED. Admitted Exhibits on File in District Court? No. Video/Audio Exhibits on File in District Court? Yes Electronic ROA deadline satisfied. [25-10375] (DDL) [Entered: 05/23/2025 01:41 PM] |
| Filing 17 ELECTRONIC RECORD ON APPEAL REQUESTED from District Court for 3:24-CV-3027. Electronic ROA due on 05/14/2025. [25-10375] (LEF) [Entered: 04/29/2025 11:16 AM] |
| Filing 15 AFFIDAVIT OF FINANCIAL STATUS filed by Appellant Ms. Arlene Perez-Merino in support of the Motion to proceed IFP filed by Appellant Ms. Arlene Perez-Merino in 25-10375 [ # 12 ].. Affidavit deadline satisfied. [25-10375] (LEF) [Entered: 04/29/2025 11:07 AM] |
| Filing 14 DOCUMENT RECEIVED - NO ACTION TAKEN. No action will be taken at this time on the proposed order received from Appellant Ms. Arlene Perez-Merino because we create our own orders; a proposed order is unnecessary [25-10375] (CAG) [Entered: 04/21/2025 02:10 PM] |
| Filing 13 DOCUMENT RECEIVED - NO ACTION TAKEN. No action will be taken at this time on the motion to supplement IFP motion received from Appellant Ms. Arlene Perez-Merino because it is unnecessary; the declaration is filed as appellant's motion for IFP. [25-10375] (CAG) [Entered: 04/21/2025 02:06 PM] |
| Filing 12 MOTION filed by Appellant Ms. Arlene Perez-Merino to proceed in forma pauperis [12]. Affidavit due on 05/12/2025 for Appellant Arlene Perez-Merino. [25-10375] (CAG) [Entered: 04/21/2025 01:58 PM] |
| Filing 11 UPDATED CASE PROCESSING NOTICE sent. [25-10375] (RLJ) [Entered: 04/14/2025 02:41 PM] |
| Filing 8 DISTRICT COURT ORDER of 03/18/2025 denying IFP for Appellant Ms. Arlene Perez-Merino. Fee due on 05/08/2025 for Appellant Arlene Perez-Merino [25-10375] (LEF) [Entered: 04/08/2025 04:21 PM] |
| Filing 7 DISTRICT COURT ORDER of 03/18/2025 denying #17, motion to reopen court order and judgment and request for expedited hearing [25-10375] (LEF) [Entered: 04/08/2025 04:20 PM] |
| Filing 6 INITIAL CASE CHECK by Attorney Advisor complete. Action: Case OK to Process after monitoring for Monitoring for DC #17, motion to reopen court order and judgment and request for expedited hearing.. [6] Initial AA Check Due satisfied.. [25-10375] (RLJ) [Entered: 03/14/2025 03:42 PM] |
| Filing 1 CIVIL RIGHTS CASE docketed. NOA filed by Appellant Ms. Arlene Perez-Merino [25-10375] (RLJ) [Entered: 03/11/2025 04:22 PM] |
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.
