Isaiah Hood-Bey v. Department of Motor Vehicles, et al
| Isaiah Hood-Bey |
| Department of Motor Vehicles, Douglas County Court, State of Nebraska, Officer Noah Zendejas, (2513), Luciano S. Rizzo, (1930), Lacee K. Gerweck, (Y656), Austin Beck, (2443) and Jessica Walker, (2520) |
| 25-2201 |
| June 17, 2025 |
| U.S. Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit |
| Other Civil Rights |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on October 16, 2025. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| MANDATE ISSUED. [5568417] [25-2201] (NDG) [Entered: 10/16/2025 11:08 AM] |
| JUDGMENT FILED - This case is summarily affirmed in accordance with Eighth Circuit Rule 47A. The motion to proceed on appeal in forma pauperis [ # 5539598-2 ] is denied as moot. JAMES B. LOKEN, LAVENSKI R. SMITH and JANE KELLY Adp Sep 2025 [5560954] [25-2201] (NDG) [Entered: 09/24/2025 11:25 AM] |
| CASE SUBMITTED Ad Panel Submission before Judges James B. Loken, Lavenski R. Smith, Jane Kelly in St. Louis [5560950] [25-2201] (NDG) [Entered: 09/24/2025 11:21 AM] |
| UPDATED fee status - [Case Number 25-2201: paid - cs] [5558123] [25-2201] (RDB) [Entered: 09/15/2025 03:51 PM] |
| CLERK LETTER sent regarding money orders sent to the district court. [5542054] [25-2201, 25-2270] (RDB) [Entered: 07/28/2025 03:14 PM] |
| LETTER from Appellant Isaiah Hood-Bey in 25-2201, 25-2270 regarding payment of filing fees w/service 07/28/2025. [5542018] [25-2201, 25-2270] (RDB) [Entered: 07/28/2025 02:19 PM] |
| MEMORANDUM of Appellant Isaiah Hood-Bey in support of originating court document notice of appeal, , Doc No. [ # 5528079-2 ]. w/service 07/21/2025. [5539602] [25-2201] (RDB) [Entered: 07/22/2025 09:08 AM] |
| MOTION for leave to proceed on appeal in forma pauperis, filed by Appellant Isaiah Hood-Bey w/service 07/21/2025. [5539598] [25-2201] (RDB) [Entered: 07/22/2025 09:06 AM] |
| CLERK ORDER:APPELLANT has failed to pay to the Clerk of the District Court the requisite docketing fees. APPELLANT is directed to show cause within 14 days why this appeal should not be dismissed for failure to prosecute. Response of Isaiah Hood-Bey due 08/01/2025 [5538831] [25-2201] (RDB) [Entered: 07/18/2025 11:35 AM] |
| Civil case docketed. [5528075] [25-2201] (RDB) [Entered: 06/17/2025 01:12 PM] |
| Originating court document filed consisting of notice of appeal, docket entries, Order dated 4/22/2025, Order dated 4/30/2025, Order dated 6/3/2025, Order dated 6/17/2025 [5528079] [25-2201] (RDB) [Entered: 06/17/2025 01:18 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 this court within 28 days of the date of this order. If appellant does not pay the fee or move for IFP status by 07/15/2025, this appeal may be dismissed for failure to prosecute without further notice. [5528081] [25-2201] (RDB) [Entered: 06/17/2025 01:18 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. [5528082] [25-2201] (RDB) [Entered: 06/17/2025 01:20 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.
