Steven Crowe v. John Whitley, et al
| MARK T. ESPER, Secretary of the Army, sued in his official capacity |
| STEVEN W. CROWE |
| JOHN E. WHITLEY, Acting Secretary of the Army and RYAN D. MCCARTHY |
| 21-15802 |
| May 3, 2021 |
| U.S. Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit |
| Other |
Opinions
We have the following opinions for this case:
| Description |
|---|
 STEVEN CROWE V. CHRISTINE WORMUTH, ET AL
|
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on July 1, 2021. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 11 MEDIATION ORDER FILED: This case is RELEASED from the Mediation Program. Counsel are requested to contact the Circuit Mediator should circumstances develop that warrant settlement discussions while the appeal is pending. [12160957] (CL) [Entered: 07/01/2021 04:51 PM] |
| Filing 10 MEDIATION ORDER FILED: By 06/09/2021, counsel to email Circuit Mediator regarding settlement potential. Include Ninth Circuit case name and number in subject line. This communication will be kept confidential, if requested, and should not be filed with the court. The existing briefing schedule remains in effect. SEE ORDER FOR DETAILS. [12125939] (CL) [Entered: 05/26/2021 04:27 PM] |
| Filing 9 The Mediation Questionnaire for this case was filed on 05/17/2021. To submit pertinent confidential information directly to the Circuit Mediators, please use the following # link . Confidential submissions may include any information relevant to mediation of the case and settlement potential, including, but not limited to, settlement history, ongoing or potential settlement discussions, non-litigated party related issues, other pending actions, and timing considerations that may impact mediation efforts.[12115947]. [21-15802] (AD) [Entered: 05/17/2021 06:44 PM] |
| Filing 8 Filed (ECF) Appellant Steven W. Crowe Mediation Questionnaire. Date of service: 05/17/2021. [12115533] [21-15802] (Smith, Elbridge) [Entered: 05/17/2021 02:44 PM] |
| Filing 7 Added Attorney(s) Elbridge W. Smith for party(s) Appellant Steven W. Crowe, in case 21-15802. [12115259] (DJV) [Entered: 05/17/2021 01:10 PM] |
| Filing 6 Terminated Elbridge W. Smith for Steven W. Crowe in 21-15802 [12115249] (DJV) [Entered: 05/17/2021 01:05 PM] |
| Filing 5 Added Attorney(s) Elbridge Zenichi Smith for party(s) Appellant Steven W. Crowe, in case 21-15802. [12115248] (DJV) [Entered: 05/17/2021 01:04 PM] |
| Filing 4 Added Attorney(s) Elbridge W. Smith for party(s) Appellant Steven W. Crowe, in case 21-15802. [12114401] (DJV) [Entered: 05/17/2021 07:08 AM] |
| Filing 3 Filed (ECF) notice of appearance of Elbridge Z. Smith (SMITH HIMMELMANN, AAL, ALC, 745 Fort Street, Suite 311, Honolulu, Hawaii 96813) for Appellant Steven W. Crowe. Date of service: 05/14/2021. (Party was previously proceeding with counsel.) [12114146] [21-15802] (Smith, Elbridge) [Entered: 05/14/2021 05:24 PM] |
| Filing 2 MEDIATION ORDER FILED: The court of appeals' records do not indicate that appellant has filed a mediation questionnaire in accordance with Cir. R. 3-4. Within seven (7) days of the filing date of this order, appellant shall file a Mediation Questionnaire or dismiss the appeal voluntarily. [12113689] (LW) [Entered: 05/14/2021 02:30 PM] |
| Filing 1 DOCKETED CAUSE AND ENTERED APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL. SEND MQ: Yes. The schedule is set as follows: Appellant Steven W. Crowe Mediation Questionnaire due on 05/10/2021. Transcript ordered by 06/01/2021. Transcript due 06/29/2021. Appellant Steven W. Crowe opening brief due 08/09/2021. Appellees Ryan D. McCarthy and John E. Whitley answering brief due 09/07/2021. Appellant's optional reply brief is due 21 days after service of the answering brief. [12099477] (JPD) [Entered: 05/03/2021 10:26 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.
