Michael Henson v. Christopher Rodriguez
| Michael Conrad Henson |
| Christopher Rodriguez, Dentist, Washington County Detention Center |
| 25-2379 |
| July 14, 2025 |
| U.S. Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit |
| Prisoner - Civil Rights |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on October 9, 2025. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| MANDATE ISSUED. [5566392] [25-2379] (CRJ) [Entered: 10/09/2025 01:24 PM] |
| JUDGMENT FILED - This case is summarily affirmed in accordance with Eighth Circuit Rule 47A. JAMES B. LOKEN, LAVENSKI R. SMITH and JANE KELLY Adp Sep 2025 [5555877] [25-2379] (CRJ) [Entered: 09/09/2025 02:29 PM] |
| CASE SUBMITTED Ad Panel Submission before Judges James B. Loken, Lavenski R. Smith, Jane Kelly in St. Louis [5555876] [25-2379] (CRJ) [Entered: 09/09/2025 02:27 PM] |
| UPDATED fee status - [Case Number 25-2379: plra] [5545219] [25-2379] (RDB) [Entered: 08/06/2025 09:37 AM] |
| Originating court document filed consisting of originating court order of 08/05/2025 regarding calculation of fees, [5545218] [25-2379] (RDB) [Entered: 08/06/2025 09:36 AM] |
| UPDATED fee status - [Case Number 25-2379: pending] [5536749] [25-2379] (RDB) [Entered: 07/14/2025 01:55 PM] |
| Prisoner case docketed. [5536753] [25-2379] (RDB) [Entered: 07/14/2025 01:56 PM] |
| Originating court document filed consisting of notice of appeal, docket entries, Report and Recommendation dated 6/4/2025, Order dated 6/25/2025 [5536755] [25-2379] (RDB) [Entered: 07/14/2025 02:00 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. [5536756] [25-2379] (RDB) [Entered: 07/14/2025 02:02 PM] |
| CLERK ORDER:for limited remand Upon review of the district court's record, the appellant was previously allowed to proceed in forma pauperis pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Section 1915 as amended by the Prison Litigation Reform Act. This case is remanded to district court for calculation and collection of appellate filing fees pursuant to Henderson v. Norris, 129F.3d 481 (8th Cir. 1997). [5536759] [25-2379] (RDB) [Entered: 07/14/2025 02:03 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.
| Search for this case: Michael Henson v. Christopher Rodriguez | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Plaintiff: Michael Conrad Henson | |
| Represented By: | Michael Conrad Henson |
| 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 ] |
| Defendant: Christopher Rodriguez, Dentist, Washington County Detention Center | |
| 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.
