Chad Vice v. Lee County Sheriff Department, et al
| Chad M. Vice |
| Lee County Sheriff Department, Lee County Correctional Center, John Canida and John Does |
| 21-3909 |
| December 22, 2021 |
| U.S. Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit |
| Other |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on February 2, 2022. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| JUDGMENT FILED - The motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis [ # 5115833-2 ] has been considered and is granted. The full $505 appellate and docketing fees are assessed against the appellant. Appellant will be permitted to pay the fee by installment method contained in 28 U.S.C. sec. 1915(b)(2). The court remands the calculation of the installments and the collection of the fees to the district court. This case is summarily affirmed in accordance with Eighth Circuit Rule 47A. The motion for appointment of counsel [ # 5110814-2 ] is denied as moot. STEVEN M. COLLOTON, RAYMOND W. GRUENDER and BOBBY E. SHEPHERD Adp Jan 2022 [5123359] [21-3909] (NDG) [Entered: 02/02/2022 01:41 PM] |
| CASE SUBMITTED Ad Panel Submission before Judges Steven M. Colloton, Raymond W. Gruender, Bobby E. Shepherd in St. Louis [5123356] [21-3909] (NDG) [Entered: 02/02/2022 01:34 PM] |
| LETTER from Appellant Mr. Chad M. Vice in 21-3907 regarding correction of case filing numbers and certificate of serivces. [5118664] [21-3907, 21-3909] (CMH) [Entered: 01/19/2022 03:20 PM] |
| MOTION for leave to proceed on appeal in forma pauperis w/attached affidavit with cover letter and additional various documents including medical records, filed by Appellant Mr. Chad M. Vice w/service 01/13/2022. [5117079] [21-3909] (CMH) [Entered: 01/13/2022 02:14 PM] |
| MOTION for leave to proceed on appeal in forma pauperis w/attached affidavit, filed by Appellant Mr. Chad M. Vice in 21-3907, 21-3909 w/service 01/10/2022. [5115833] [21-3907, 21-3909] (CMH) [Entered: 01/10/2022 02:47 PM] |
| MOTION for appointment of counsel, filed by Appellant Mr. Chad M. Vice in 21-3907 w/service 12/22/2021. [5110814] [21-3907, 21-3909] (CMH) [Entered: 12/22/2021 03:21 PM] |
| Originating court document filed consisting of notice of appeal, docket entries, Order filed 11/23/2021, Judgmetn filed 11/24/2021 and Order filed 12/16/2021. [5110700] [21-3909] (CMH) [Entered: 12/22/2021 01:19 PM] |
| CLERK ORDER:The $505 appellate filing and docketing fee has not been paid and is due. Appellant is directed to either pay the fee in the district court or file a motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis in this court within 28 days of the date of this order. If appellant does not pay the fee or move for IFP status by 01/19/2022, this appeal may be dismissed for failure to prosecute without further notice. [5110703] [21-3909] (CMH) [Entered: 12/22/2021 01:21 PM] |
| CLERK ORDER:If the original file of the United States District Court is available for review in electronic format, the court will rely on the electronic version of the record in its review. The appendices required by Eighth Circuit Rule 30A shall not be required. In accordance with Eighth Circuit Local Rule 30A(a)(2), the Clerk of the United States District Court is requested to forward to this Court forthwith any portions of the original record which are not available in an electronic format through PACER, including any documents maintained in paper format or filed under seal, exhibits, administrative records and state court files. These documents should be submitted within 10 days. [5110707] [21-3909] (CMH) [Entered: 12/22/2021 01:23 PM] |
| Prisoner case docketed. [5110681] [21-3909] (CMH) [Entered: 12/22/2021 01:00 PM] |
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.
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.
