In re: Lateshia Patillo
| In re: Lateshia Patillo |
| 19-1606 |
| March 25, 2019 |
| U.S. Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit |
| Other |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on March 27, 2019. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| MANDATE ISSUED. [4771424] [19-1606] (YML) [Entered: 03/27/2019 03:50 PM] |
| JUDGMENT FILED - Denying [ # 4770122-2 ] petition for writ of mandamus filed by Petitioner Ms. Lateshia Patillo. Mandate shall issue forthwith., DENIED. JANE KELLY, ROGER L. WOLLMAN and RALPH R. ERICKSON Adp Apr 2019 [4771405] [19-1606] (YML) [Entered: 03/27/2019 03:26 PM] |
| CASE SUBMITTED Ad Panel Submission before Judges Jane Kelly, Roger L. Wollman, Ralph R. Erickson in St. Louis [4771403] [19-1606] (YML) [Entered: 03/27/2019 03:22 PM] |
| PETITION for Writ of Mandamus (Rec'd by MAIL) filed by Petitioner Ms. Lateshia Patillo w/service 03/25/2019 [4770122] [19-1606] (CMH) [Entered: 03/25/2019 11:08 AM] |
| ORIGINAL PROCEEDING case docketed. [4770071] [19-1606] (CMH) [Entered: 03/25/2019 10:15 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.
| Search for this case: In re: Lateshia Patillo | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Petitioner: In re: Lateshia Patillo | |
| Represented By: | Lateshia Patillo |
| 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 | [ Unicourt | 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.
