Miller v. Taylor

Miller v. Taylor

Plaintiff:	Garrick Lashun Miller, also known as Rabbit
Defendant:	Brad Taylor, NBN Agent, In Both His Individual and Official Capacity, William Randel Yeatman, NBN Agent, In Both His Individual and Official Capacity, also known as Bo Yeatman, Andre Adams, MDOC Officer, In Both His Individual and Official Capacity, Shirlian Mims, MDOC Officer, In Both Her Official and Individual Capacity, Ronnie Sloan, NBN Agent, In Both His Official and Individual Capacity, Kirt Myres, MDOC Officer, In Both His Official and Individual Capacity, B.J. Gladney, NBN Agent, In Both His Official and Individual Capacity, also known as Barry Gladney, Dana Sloan, Court Clerk of Monroe County, In Both Her Official and Individual Capacity and All Other Unknown Officers/Agents Deputies, In Their Individual Capacity and In Their Official Capacity
Case Number:	26-60324
Filed:	May 6, 2026
Court:	U.S. Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit
Nature of Suit:	Prison Conditions

RSS Track this Docket

Docket Report

This docket was last retrieved on October 27, 2026. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.

Date Filed	Document Text
October 27, 2026	Filing 29 DOCUMENT RECEIVED - NO ACTION TAKEN. No action will be taken at this time on the motion to clarify docket association of application for a certificate of appealability and to direct appropriate docketing and motion for a certificate of appealability received from Appellant Mr. Garrick Lashun Miller because a motion for COA is not required [26-60324] (SR) [Entered: 10/29/2026 04:55 PM]
October 19, 2026	Filing 28 DOCUMENT RECEIVED - NO ACTION TAKEN. No action will be taken at this time on the appellant brief received from Appellant Mr. Garrick Lashun Miller because brief already processed [26-60324] (SR) [Entered: 10/27/2026 12:59 PM]
October 16, 2026	Filing 22 BRIEFING COMPLETE. [26-60324] (SR) [Entered: 10/16/2026 09:34 AM]
October 13, 2026	Filing 24 DOCUMENT RECEIVED - NO ACTION TAKEN. No action will be taken at this time on the additional appellant brief received from Appellant Mr. Garrick Lashun Miller because brief already processed [26-60324] (SR) [Entered: 10/16/2026 10:48 AM]
October 13, 2026	Filing 21 PROPOSED SUFFICIENT BRIEF filed by Appellant Mr. Garrick Lashun Miller in 26-60324 [ # 20 ] Brief has been deemed sufficient. Sufficient Brief deadline satisfied [26-60324] (SR) [Entered: 10/16/2026 09:34 AM]
September 24, 2026	Filing 19 CLERK ORDER denying Motion to file brief in excess pages filed by Appellant Mr. Garrick Lashun Miller [ # 15 ] [26-60324] (SR) [Entered: 09/24/2026 11:33 AM]
September 22, 2026	Filing 20 SUFFICIENT APPELLANT'S BRIEF FILED by Mr. Garrick Lashun Miller insufficient. Brief requires attachments to be removed from the brief and brief cannot exceed 30 pages. Instructions to Attorney: PLEASE READ THE ATTACHED NOTICE FOR INSTRUCTIONS ON HOW TO REMEDY THE DEFAULT. A/Pet's Brief deadline satisfied. Sufficient Brief due on 10/08/2026 for Appellant Garrick Lashun Miller. [26-60324] (SR) [Entered: 09/24/2026 11:39 AM]
September 22, 2026	Filing 15 MOTION filed by Appellant Mr. Garrick Lashun Miller to file brief in excess of the page limitations but not to exceed 69 pages [15]. Date of service: 09/14/2026 [26-60324] (SR) [Entered: 09/24/2026 09:35 AM]
September 22, 2026	Filing 14 DOCUMENT RECEIVED - NO ACTION TAKEN. No action will be taken at this time on the motion for a certificate of appealability received from Appellant Mr. Garrick Lashun Miller because COA not required in a PLRA prison conditions case [26-60324] (SR) [Entered: 09/24/2026 09:22 AM]
August 12, 2026	Filing 13 BRIEFING NOTICE ISSUED A/Pet's Brief due on 09/21/2026 for Appellant Garrick Lashun Miller. [26-60324] (RA) [Entered: 08/12/2026 03:26 PM]
August 12, 2026	Filing 12 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. [26-60324] (RA) [Entered: 08/12/2026 03:26 PM]
July 31, 2026	Filing 11 ELECTRONIC RECORD ON APPEAL REQUESTED from District Court for 1:25-CV-86. Electronic ROA due on 08/17/2026. [26-60324] (RLL) [Entered: 07/31/2026 04:49 PM]
July 31, 2026	Filing 10 INITIAL CASE CHECK by Attorney Advisor complete. Action: Case OK to Process. [10] Initial AA Check Due satisfied. [26-60324] (RLL) [Entered: 07/31/2026 04:48 PM]
June 30, 2026	Filing 7 DISTRICT COURT ORDER of 06/24/2026 granting IFP in accordance with the Prison Litigation Reform Act (PLRA) for Appellant Mr. Garrick Lashun Miller. Initial partial filing fee assessed. [26-60324] (RLL) [Entered: 06/30/2026 02:50 PM]
June 15, 2026	Filing 6 FORWARDING MOTION for IFP received from Appellant Mr. Garrick Lashun Miller to the District Court for filing. Fee deadline canceled. [26-60324] (RLL) [Entered: 06/22/2026 09:05 AM]
June 15, 2026	Filing 5 Form 2 Notice filed by Appellant Mr. Garrick Lashun Miller advising motion to proceed IFP was filed in DC on 06/01/2026. But, confirmed with DC that no motion to proceed IFP has been received and/or filed. However, docs attached hereto reference indigency, so forwarded to DC as misrouted NOA. Sent letter to appellant advising same and that further notice will issue upon DC handling of current documents. [26-60324] (RLL) [Entered: 06/22/2026 08:49 AM]
May 8, 2026	Filing 4 DOCUMENT RECEIVED - NO ACTION TAKEN. No action will be taken at this time on the Brief of Appellant and attachments received from Appellant Mr. Garrick Lashun Miller because brief is premature and attachments to brief are not allowed without leave of court. Additionally, filing fee or motion to proceeed in forma pauperis remains due on or before 06/30/2026. [26-60324] (RLL) [Entered: 05/08/2026 12:53 PM]
May 6, 2026	Filing 3 FILING FEE IS REQUIRED. Fee or motion for IFP in DC due on 06/30/2026 for Appellant Garrick Lashun Miller [26-60324] (CMC) [Entered: 05/06/2026 10:20 AM]
May 6, 2026	Filing 1 PRISONER CASE WITHOUT COUNSEL docketed. NOA filed by Appellant Mr. Garrick Lashun Miller [26-60324] (CMC) [Entered: 05/06/2026 10:18 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.

Search for this case: Miller v. Taylor
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]
Plaintiff: Garrick Lashun Miller, also known as Rabbit
Represented By:	Garrick Lashun Miller
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Finance	[ Google Finance \| Yahoo Finance \| Hoovers \| SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web	[ Justia Dockets \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]
Defendant: Brad Taylor, NBN Agent, In Both His Individual and Official Capacity
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Finance	[ Google Finance \| Yahoo Finance \| Hoovers \| SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web	[ Justia Dockets \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]
Defendant: William Randel Yeatman, NBN Agent, In Both His Individual and Official Capacity, also known as Bo Yeatman
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Finance	[ Google Finance \| Yahoo Finance \| Hoovers \| SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web	[ Justia Dockets \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]
Defendant: Andre Adams, MDOC Officer, In Both His Individual and Official Capacity
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Finance	[ Google Finance \| Yahoo Finance \| Hoovers \| SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web	[ Justia Dockets \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]
Defendant: Shirlian Mims, MDOC Officer, In Both Her Official and Individual Capacity
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Finance	[ Google Finance \| Yahoo Finance \| Hoovers \| SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web	[ Justia Dockets \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]
Defendant: Ronnie Sloan, NBN Agent, In Both His Official and Individual Capacity
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Finance	[ Google Finance \| Yahoo Finance \| Hoovers \| SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web	[ Justia Dockets \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]
Defendant: Kirt Myres, MDOC Officer, In Both His Official and Individual Capacity
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Finance	[ Google Finance \| Yahoo Finance \| Hoovers \| SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web	[ Justia Dockets \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]
Defendant: B.J. Gladney, NBN Agent, In Both His Official and Individual Capacity, also known as Barry Gladney
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Finance	[ Google Finance \| Yahoo Finance \| Hoovers \| SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web	[ Justia Dockets \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]
Defendant: Dana Sloan, Court Clerk of Monroe County, In Both Her Official and Individual Capacity
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Finance	[ Google Finance \| Yahoo Finance \| Hoovers \| SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web	[ Justia Dockets \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]
Defendant: All Other Unknown Officers/Agents Deputies, In Their Individual Capacity and In Their Official Capacity
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Finance	[ Google Finance \| Yahoo Finance \| Hoovers \| SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web	[ Justia Dockets \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]

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.

Why Is My Information Online?