In re: Carlton Roark, et al v. Leslie Gladstone, et al
| NORTH ISLAND FINANCIAL CREDIT UNION, CALIFORNIA CREDIT UNION, SAN DIEGO COUNTY CREDIT UNION and LESLIE T. GLADSTONE, Trustee |
| CARLTON ROARK |
| In the Matter of: CARLTON ROARK |
| 21-55040 |
| January 15, 2021 |
| U.S. Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit |
| Other |
Opinions
We have the following opinions for this case:
| Description |
|---|
| CARLTON ROARK V. LESLIE GLADSTONE |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on January 20, 2021. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 2 Filed Appellant Mr. Carlton Roark motion to appoint counsel. Deficiencies: None. [11969457] (JFF) [Entered: 01/20/2021 11:54 AM] |
| Filing 5 Filed Appellant Mr. Carlton Roark letter dated re: Certificate of service. Paper filing deficiency: None. [11969478] (JFF) [Entered: 01/20/2021 12:02 PM] |
| Filing 4 Filed Appellant Mr. Carlton Roark motion to supplement record on appeal. Deficiencies: None. [11969475] (JFF) [Entered: 01/20/2021 12:00 PM] |
| Filing 3 Filed Appellant Mr. Carlton Roark motion to compel release of evidentiary documentation. Deficiencies: None. [11969470] (JFF) [Entered: 01/20/2021 11:58 AM] |
| Filing 1 DOCKETED CAUSE AND ENTERED APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL AND PRO SE APPELLANT. SEND MQ: No. The schedule is set as follows: Appellant Carlton Roark opening brief due 03/15/2021. Appellees California Credit Union, Leslie T. Gladstone, North Island Financial Credit Union and San Diego County Credit Union answering brief due 04/15/2021. Appellant's optional reply brief is due 21 days after service of the answering brief. [11965195] (RT) [Entered: 01/15/2021 09:49 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.
