Gerald Enquist v. Andria Conger, et al
| PIERCE COUNTY SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT, ANDRIA SHAW CONGER, PIERCE COUNTY, PAUL PASTOR and STATE OF WASHINGTON |
| GERALD D. ENQUIST |
| 19-35217 |
| March 20, 2019 |
| U.S. Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit |
| Other |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on May 17, 2019. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 4 Filed (ECF) Appellees Andria Shaw Conger, Paul Pastor, Pierce County and Pierce County Sheriff's Department Correspondence: Notice of Absence of Counsel for Pierce County Defendants - Appellees. Date of service: 05/17/2019 [11301745] [19-35217] (Cornelius, Frank) [Entered: 05/17/2019 03:08 PM] |
| Filing 3 Received original and 7 copies of Appellant Gerald D. Enquist opening brief (Informal: No) 16 pages. Served on 05/03/2019. Major deficiencies: fee due. [11293454] (KT) [Entered: 05/10/2019 01:01 PM] |
| Filing 2 Filed (ECF) Appellees Andria Shaw Conger, Paul Pastor, Pierce County and Pierce County Sheriff's Department Correspondence: Notice of Absence of Counsel. Date of service: 04/04/2019 [11252991] [19-35217] (Cornelius, Frank) [Entered: 04/04/2019 11:42 AM] |
| Filing 1 DOCKETED CAUSE AND ENTERED APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL AND PRO SE APPELLANT. SEND MQ: No. The schedule is set as follows: Appellant Gerald D. Enquist opening brief due 05/17/2019. Appellees Andria Shaw Conger, Paul Pastor, Pierce County, Pierce County Sheriff's Department and State of Washington answering brief due 06/17/2019. Appellant's optional reply brief is due 21 days after service of the answering brief. [11235018] (JBS) [Entered: 03/20/2019 09:09 AM] |
Access additional case information on PACER
Access the Case Summary and Docket Report to access additional information about this case on the US 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.
