Brent Ristow v. Douglas Peterson, et al
| Brent A. Ristow |
| Douglas R. Peterson, Thomas Henry Boyd, Juan G. Hoyos, John Michael Koneck, Mark S. Kuppe, Shawne M. Monahan, Cheryl M. Prince, Pamela A. Thein, Timothy Yuen Wong, Carol Martens, Erin C. Wacker, Natasha Karn, Karen McGillic and Amanda Cunningham |
| 22-3029 |
| September 27, 2022 |
| U.S. Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit |
| Other Civil Rights |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on November 18, 2022. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| BRIEF FILED - APPELLANT BRIEF WITH ATTACHED "APPENDIX" filed by Mr. Brent A. Ristow. w/service 11/18/2022 , Length: 6,006 words (5 Copies) Brief of Thomas Henry Boyd, Amanda Cunningham, Juan G. Hoyos, Natasha Karn, John Michael Koneck, Mark S. Kuppe, Carol Martens, Karen McGillic, Shawne M. Monahan, Douglas R. Peterson, Cheryl M. Prince, Pamela A. Thein, Erin C. Wacker and Timothy Yuen Wong due on 12/19/2022 [5219336] [22-3029]--[Edited 11/18/2022 by AMT] DOCUMENTS REPLACED TO INCLUDE SIGNED COPIES OF THE BRIEF AND ATTACHED APPENDIX-NDA RESENT. (AMT) [Entered: 11/18/2022 01:31 PM] |
| Tendered Brief received from Appellant Brent A. Ristow w/service 11/18/2022 [5219297] [22-3029] (MMH) [Entered: 11/18/2022 11:52 AM] |
| APPEARANCE filed by Jerome D Feriancek for Appellee Ms. Amanda Cunningham w/service 11/15/2022 [5217865] [22-3029] (JDF) [Entered: 11/15/2022 08:38 AM] |
| CLERK ORDER:Denying [ # 5204192-2 ] motion for stay filed by Appellant Mr. Brent A. Ristow., Appellant's brief is due 11/18/2022. [5208288] [22-3029] (MTB) [Entered: 10/17/2022 11:03 AM] |
| CLERK LETTER sent to hold briefing schedule in abeyance pending disposition of the motion for stay pending appeal. [5204389] [22-3029]--[Edited 10/04/2022 by MTB] (MTB) [Entered: 10/04/2022 09:36 AM] |
| MOTION for stay pending appeal, filed by Appellant Mr. Brent A. Ristow w/service 09/30/2022. [5204192] [22-3029] (MTB) [Entered: 10/03/2022 04:11 PM] |
| Tendered Cover Letter and Motion received from Appellant Mr. Brent A. Ristow [5203632] [22-3029] (CBO) [Entered: 09/30/2022 03:45 PM] |
| Civil case docketed. [5202063] [22-3029] (CBO) [Entered: 09/27/2022 08:50 AM] |
| Originating court document filed consisting of docket entries, Memorandum Opinion and Order filed 9/14/2022, Judgment filed 9/15/2022, and Notice of Appeal filed 9/23/2022. [5202068] [22-3029] (CBO) [Entered: 09/27/2022 08:57 AM] |
| BRIEFING SCHEDULE SET AS FOLLOWS: If the original file of the U.S. 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 8th Circuit Rule 30A shall not be required. In accordance with 8th 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 or filed under seal, exhibits, administrative records and state court files. BRIEF OF APPELLANT Brent A. Ristow due 11/07/2022. Appellee brief is due 30 days from the date the court issues the Notice of Docket Activity filing the brief of appellant. [5202069] [22-3029] (CBO) [Entered: 09/27/2022 08:59 AM] |
| APPEARANCE filed by Joseph D. Weiner for Appellees Mr. Thomas Henry Boyd, Mr. Juan G. Hoyos, Ms. Natasha Karn, Mr. John Michael Koneck, Mr. Mark S. Kuppe, Ms. Carol Martens, Ms. Karen McGillic, Ms. Shawne M. Monahan, Douglas R. Peterson, Ms. Cheryl M. Prince, Ms. Pamela A. Thein, Ms. Erin C. Wacker and Mr. Timothy Yuen Wong w/service 09/27/2022 [5202182] [22-3029] (JDW) [Entered: 09/27/2022 11:03 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.
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.
