William Rankin v. Brian Lavan and Associates, P.C., et al
| WILLIAM A. RANKIN |
| BRIAN LAVAN AND ASSOCIATES, P.C., COLLENE K. CORCORAN, PLUNKETT COONEY, P.C., J. DOUGLAS DRUSHAL, COMMONWEALTH LAND TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY, MICHAEL JAMES, CHRISTOPHER W. WARD, TEACHERS INSURANCE AND ANNUITY, JAMES LANSETTA, MICHAEL J. COOK and ROBERT T. DETWEILER |
| 25-1100 |
| January 31, 2025 |
| U.S. Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit |
| Other Statutory Actions |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on March 17, 2025. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 7 Appellant second MOTION for affirmative relief and reply to response filed by Mr. William A. Rankin . Certificate of service: 03/13/2025. (ASM) [Entered: 03/17/2025 02:21 PM] |
| Filing 6 Appellant MOTION for affirmative relief and reply to response filed by Mr. William A. Rankin. Certificate of service: 03/01/2025. (ASM) [Entered: 03/17/2025 12:45 PM] |
| Filing 5 Appellant MOTION for default judgment filed by Mr. William A. Rankin. Certificate of service: 02/15/2025. (ASM) [Entered: 02/24/2025 02:13 PM] |
| Filing 4 APPELLANT BRIEF filed by Mr. William A. Rankin Certificate of Service:02/08/2025. Argument Request: not requested. (MRL) [Entered: 02/13/2025 11:25 AM] |
| Filing 3 BRIEFING LETTER SENT setting pro se briefing schedule: appellant brief due 03/18/2025. (ASM) [Entered: 02/03/2025 07:39 AM] |
| Filing 2 The case manager for this case is: Antoinette Macon (ASM) [Entered: 01/31/2025 03:51 PM] |
| Filing 1 Civil Case Docketed. Notice filed by Appellant Mr. William A. Rankin. Transcript needed: n. (ASM) [Entered: 01/31/2025 03:35 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.
