Andrew Barnette-Kruger v. State of Missouri, et al
| Andrew Lawrence Barnette-Kruger |
| State of Missouri, Cole County Sheriff's Department, Justin Fenwick and Joe Creeger |
| 25-1696 |
| April 9, 2025 |
| U.S. Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit |
| Other Personal Injury |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on May 21, 2025. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| MANDATE ISSUED. [5518953] [25-1696] (BNW) [Entered: 05/21/2025 03:01 PM] |
| JUDGE ORDER:Denying [ # 5510202-2 ] petition for rehearing by panel filed by Appellant Andrew Lawrence Barnette-Kruger. Adp Apr 2025 [5516464] [25-1696] (BNW) [Entered: 05/14/2025 09:27 AM] |
| JUDGE ORDER: Appellant has not complied with this courts April 9, 2025, order that he pay the appellate filing fee. Appellant is directed to pay the filing fee by May 9, 2025. Docket fee due on 05/09/2025. Adp Apr 2025. [5513869] [25-1696] (CJO) [Entered: 05/06/2025 09:10 AM] |
| UPDATED fee status - [Case Number 25-1696: due] Fee status updated to "due" as the court has been notified by the district court that the appellate filing fee payment has been returned by the bank.[5513413] [25-1696] (CJO) [Entered: 05/05/2025 09:44 AM] |
| Originating court document filed consisting of second notice of appeal, docket entries, Order 03/25/2025 and Petition for Certiorari. [5513816] [25-1696]--[Edited 05/06/2025 by CJO to generate acknowledgment letter] (BNW) [Entered: 05/06/2025 08:14 AM] |
| PETITION for rehearing by panel filed by Appellant Andrew Lawrence Barnette-Kruger w/service 04/25/2025. [5510202] [25-1696] (BNW) [Entered: 04/25/2025 07:50 AM] |
| JUDGMENT FILED - This case is summarily affirmed in accordance with Eighth Circuit Rule 47A. JAMES B. LOKEN, DUANE BENTON and DAVID R. STRAS Adp Apr 2025 [5509451] [25-1696] (BNW) [Entered: 04/23/2025 11:25 AM] |
| CASE SUBMITTED Ad Panel Submission before Judges James B. Loken, Duane Benton, David R. Stras in St. Louis [5509449] [25-1696] (BNW) [Entered: 04/23/2025 11:24 AM] |
| UPDATED fee status - [Case Number 25-1696: paid - cs] [5505152] [25-1696] (CJO) [Entered: 04/10/2025 10:24 AM] |
| Civil case docketed. [5504929] [25-1696] (CJO) [Entered: 04/09/2025 02:43 PM] |
| Originating court document filed consisting of notice of appeal, docket entries, Order 03/25/2025, Order 03/31/2025, and Order 04/07/2025. [5504934] [25-1696] (CJO) [Entered: 04/09/2025 02:48 PM] |
| CLERK ORDER: The $605 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 the district court within 21 days of the date of this order. If appellant does not pay the fee or move for IFP status by 04/30/2025, a show cause order will be entered directing the appellant to show cause why this appeal should not be dismissed for failure to prosecute. [5504938] [25-1696] (CJO) [Entered: 04/09/2025 02:51 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. [5504941] [25-1696] (CJO) [Entered: 04/09/2025 02:53 PM] |
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.
