Pierre Rushing v. Robert Neuschmid
| PIERRE RUSHING |
| ROBERT NEUSCHMID, Warden |
| 20-16067 |
| June 1, 2020 |
| U.S. Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit |
| Other |
Opinions
We have the following opinions for this case:
| Description |
|---|
| PIERRE RUSHING V. MATTHEW ATCHLEY |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on July 27, 2020. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 7 Filed (ECF) Appellant Pierre Rushing Motion for certificate of appealability. Date of service: 07/27/2020. [11767187] [20-16067] (Beles, Robert) [Entered: 07/27/2020 12:24 PM] |
| Filing 6 Filed (ECF) Appellant Pierre Rushing financial affidavit in support or request for attorney, expert, or other court services without payment of fee (CJA Form 23). Date of service: 07/15/2020. [11753677] [20-16067] (Beles, Robert) [Entered: 07/15/2020 11:21 AM] |
| Filing 5 Added Attorney(s) Paul McCarthy for party(s) Appellant Pierre Rushing, in case 20-16067. [11732073] (QDL) [Entered: 06/24/2020 11:27 AM] |
| Filing 4 Filed (ECF) notice of appearance of Paul Gilruth McCarthy (1 Kaiser Plaza suite 2300 Oakland CA 94612-3642) for Appellee Robert Neuschmid and Appellant Pierre Rushing. Date of service: 06/24/2020. (Party was previously proceeding with counsel.) [11732069] [20-16067] (McCarthy, Paul) [Entered: 06/24/2020 11:25 AM] |
| Filing 3 Filed (ECF) notice of appearance of Robert Joseph Beles (1 Kaiser Plaza suite 2300, Oakland, CA 94612-3642) for Appellee Robert Neuschmid. Substitution for Attorney Robert Joseph Beles for Appellant Pierre Rushing. Date of service: 06/24/2020. (Party was previously proceeding pro se.) [11732061] [20-16067] (Beles, Robert) [Entered: 06/24/2020 11:18 AM] |
| Filing 2 Filed order (Appellate Commissioner): Appellant was represented in the district court by retained counsel Robert Joseph Beles, Esq. On May 28, 2020, counsel Beles electronically transmitted from his electronic filing account a notice of appeal, purportedly pro se on behalf of appellant. Counsel Beles has not been granted leave to withdraw by the district court or this court. Counsel has the duty to continue to represent the appellant on appeal until counsel is relieved by this court. See 9th Cir. R. 4-1(a). Therefore, even though the notice of appeal was purportedly filed pro se, it was electronically filed from counsel Beless account, and counsel Beles remains responsible for prosecuting this appeal. The Clerk shall serve this order on counsel Beles, who shall serve a copy of this order on appellant and provide proof of service to this court showing appellants address and registration number within 21 days after the date of this order. Counsel Beles shall also, within 21 days after the date of this order, either notify this court that he intends to represent appellant on appeal or file a motion to withdraw under Ninth Circuit Rule 4-1(c). The court has received a number of notices of appeal purportedly filed pro se in cases where counsel Beles represented the appellants in the district court. Counsel Beles has been repeatedly reminded that he remains counsel of record in this court unless and until the court grants leave to withdraw under Ninth Circuit Rule 4-1(c). When filing notices of appeal on behalf of pro se litigants in any future cases, counsel Beles should carefully comply with Ninth Circuit Rule 4-1, E.D. Cal. Local Rule 131, and N.D. Cal. Civ. Local Rule 5- 1.(COA) [11708468] (JBS) [Entered: 06/02/2020 01:14 PM] |
| Filing 1 Open 9th Circuit docket: needs certificate of appealability. Date COA denied in DC: 05/12/2020. Record on appeal included: Yes. [11706496] (JMR) [Entered: 06/01/2020 10:46 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.
| Search for this case: Pierre Rushing v. Robert Neuschmid | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Petitioner / appellant: PIERRE RUSHING | |
| Represented By: | Robert Joseph Beles |
| Represented By: | Paul McCarthy |
| 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 | [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Respondent / appellee: ROBERT NEUSCHMID, Warden | |
| Represented By: | Gregory A. Ott |
| 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 | [ Unicourt | 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.
