In Re: Robert Lytle
| In re: Robert Larry Lytle |
| 24-3206 |
| October 29, 2024 |
| U.S. Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit |
| Other |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on October 31, 2024. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| JUDGMENT FILED - Denying [ # 5451695-2 ] petition for writ of mandamus filed by Petitioner Robert Larry Lytle. Mandate shall issue forthwith. DENIED. BOBBY E. SHEPHERD, RALPH R. ERICKSON and DAVID R. STRAS Adp Oct 2024 [5452212] [24-3206] (HAG) [Entered: 10/31/2024 11:30 AM] |
| MANDATE ISSUED. [5452221] [24-3206] (HAG) [Entered: 10/31/2024 11:37 AM] |
| CASE SUBMITTED Ad Panel Submission before Judges Bobby E. Shepherd, Ralph R. Erickson, David R. Stras in St. Louis [5452210] [24-3206] (HAG) [Entered: 10/31/2024 11:28 AM] |
| ORIGINAL PROCEEDING case docketed. [5451692] [24-3206] (CBO) [Entered: 10/30/2024 11:48 AM] |
| PETITION for Writ of Mandamus (Rec'd by MAIL) filed by Petitioner Robert Larry Lytle w/service 10/29/2024. [5451695] [24-3206] (CBO) [Entered: 10/30/2024 11:50 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: In Re: Robert Lytle | |
|---|---|
| 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: Robert Larry Lytle | |
| Represented By: | Robert Larry Lytle |
| 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.
