Michael Dutcher v. Trevor Foley, et al
| Michael Dutcher |
| Trevor Foley, Deanna Duff, Chrystal Schmitz, David Vandergriff, Jason Lewis, Daniel Francis, Jennifer Currie, Brian Davis, Daniel Adams, Timothy Brown, Jeremiah Richardson, Randall Odle, Nicholas Skaggs, Kevin Eckhoff, Steven Francis, Carl Miller, Rachel Gettinger, Samantha Kelley, Jarrod Anselmo, Benjamin Dement and John Hummonds |
| 25-1444 |
| March 5, 2025 |
| U.S. Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit |
| Prisoner - Civil Rights |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on August 8, 2025. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| BRIEF FILED - PRO SE APPELLANT BRIEF WITH ATTACHED APPENDIX filed by Michael Dutcher, w/service 08/08/2025. Length: 29 pages (Copies: 5). Brief of Deanna Duff, Trevor Foley, Chrystal Schmitz and David Vandergriff due on 09/08/2025. [5546418] [25-1444] (HAG) [Entered: 08/08/2025 04:22 PM] |
| JUDGE ORDER: Denying [ # 5545797-2 ] motion for appointment of counsel filed by Appellant Michael Dutcher. Adp Aug 2025 [5546340] [25-1444] (HAG) [Entered: 08/08/2025 03:04 PM] |
| Tendered: Pro Se Appellant Brief with Appendix received from Appellant Michael Dutcher [5545799] [25-1444] (HAG) [Entered: 08/07/2025 12:49 PM] |
| MOTION for appointment of counsel, filed by Appellant Michael Dutcher w/service by USCA8 08/07/2025. [5545797] [25-1444] (HAG) [Entered: 08/07/2025 12:46 PM] |
| 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 Michael Dutcher due 08/04/2025. Appellee brief is due 30 days from the date the court issues the Notice of Docket Activity filing the brief of appellant. [5530651] [25-1444] (CMH) [Entered: 06/25/2025 11:37 AM] |
| Originating court document filed consisting of originating district court order of 06/17/2025 denying plaintiff's motion for reconsideration. [5530649] [25-1444] (CMH) [Entered: 06/25/2025 11:36 AM] |
| UPDATED fee status - [Case Number 25-1444: paid - cs in district court on 05/09/2025. ] [5515677] [25-1444] (CMH) [Entered: 05/12/2025 10:17 AM] |
| CLERK ORDER: Granting [ # 5505902-2 ] motion for extension of time to file filing fee filed by Appellant Michael Dutcher. [5505907] [25-1444] (CMH) [Entered: 04/14/2025 08:43 AM] |
| MOTION for extension of time to file filing fee until 05/19/2025, filed by Appellant Michael Dutcher w/service 04/14/2025. [5505902] [25-1444] (CMH) [Entered: 04/14/2025 08:38 AM] |
| CLERK ORDER: The district Court has determined that Appellant has three strikes under 28 U.S.C Section 1915(g). Accordingly, Appellant may not proceed in this appeal without first paying the full appellate docketing fee. Appellant is directed to pay to the district court the appellate docketing fee of $605, or to file a pleading in this court explaining why Appellant is eligible to proceed without pre-payment of the fee. If appellant fails to either pay the fee or respond to this order within 30 days of the date of this order, the appeal will be dismissed for failure to prosecute. Compliance is due 04/17/2025. [5497182] [25-1444] (CMH) [Entered: 03/18/2025 11:41 AM] |
| UPDATED fee status - [Case Number 25-1444: due] [5497181] [25-1444] (CMH) [Entered: 03/18/2025 11:40 AM] |
| Originating court document filed consisting of originating district court order of 03/14/2024 denying leave to proceed on appeal in forma pauperis. [5497180] [25-1444] (CMH) [Entered: 03/18/2025 11:40 AM] |
| Originating court document filed consisting of originating district court order of 03/14/2025 notification that Michael Dutcher is not entitled to proceed in forma pauperis in this matter. [5497178] [25-1444] (CMH) [Entered: 03/18/2025 11:38 AM] |
| Originating court document filed consisting of second notice of appeal, docket entries, Memorandum & Order 02/26/2025, Order 02/26/2025, and Order 3/14/2025. [5497067] [25-1444] (CMH) [Entered: 03/18/2025 09:41 AM] |
| Originating court document filed consisting of notice of appeal, docket entries, Memorandum & Order 02/26/2025, nd Order of Dismissal 02/26/2025. [5492493] [25-1444] (CMH) [Entered: 03/05/2025 10:57 AM] |
| 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. [5492497] [25-1444] (CMH) [Entered: 03/05/2025 11:01 AM] |
| CLERK ORDER: for limited remand. This case is remanded to the district court for the limited purpose of determining the appellant's IFP status and assessment of the docketing fees pursuant to 28 USC Section 1915 as amended by PLRA. [5492496] [25-1444] (CMH) [Entered: 03/05/2025 10:58 AM] |
| Prisoner case docketed. [5492481] [25-1444] (CMH) [Entered: 03/05/2025 10:40 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.
