Stewart v. City of Carlsbad, et al.
Plaintiff: LINDSEY STEWART
Defendant: CITY OF CARLSBAD, DOES 1-10, CARLSBAD POLICE DEPARTMENT and Carlsbad Police Chief WILLIAMS
Case Number: 25-5072
Filed: August 12, 2025
Court: U.S. Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit
Nature of Suit: Other Civil Rights
Docket Report

This docket was last retrieved on January 15, 2026. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.

Date Filed Document Text
January 15, 2026 Filing 14 CLERK ACTION: The Court sua sponte grants Appellant Lindsey Stewart a 1-day extension of time to file the reply brief, which was not timely submitted. Reply Brief submitted at DE 13 by Appellant Lindsey Stewart is filed. [Entered: 01/15/2026 01:57 PM]
January 13, 2026 Filing 13 REPLY BRIEF submitted for filing by Appellant Lindsey Stewart. [Entered: 01/15/2026 01:55 PM]
December 29, 2025 Filing 12 CLERK ACTION: Answering Brief submitted at DE 10 and Excerpts of Record at DE 11 by Appellee City of Carlsbad are filed. No paper copies are required. [Entered: 12/29/2025 03:09 PM]
December 22, 2025 Filing 11 EXCERPTS OF RECORD submitted for filing by Appellee City of Carlsbad. [Entered: 12/22/2025 06:13 PM]
December 22, 2025 Filing 10 ANSWERING BRIEF submitted for filing by Appellee City of Carlsbad. [Entered: 12/22/2025 06:12 PM]
November 18, 2025 Opinion or Order Filing 9 ORDER FILED. Streamlined Request for Extension of Time to File Brief (DE 8) granted. Amended briefing schedule: Answering Brief Due (Appellee) 12/22/2025. Optional Reply Brief due 21 days after service of Answering Brief. All briefs shall be served and filed pursuant to FRAP 31 and 9th Cir. R. 31-2.1. [Entered: 11/18/2025 03:59 PM]
November 18, 2025 Filing 8 Streamlined Request for Extension of Time to File Brief filed by Appellee City of Carlsbad. [Entered: 11/18/2025 09:14 AM]
October 22, 2025 Filing 7 CLERK ACTION: Opening Brief submitted at DE 6 by Appellant Lindsey Stewart is filed. Original and 0 copies. [Entered: 10/22/2025 02:50 PM]
October 21, 2025 Filing 6 OPENING BRIEF submitted for filing by Appellant Lindsey Stewart. [Entered: 10/22/2025 02:48 PM]
October 6, 2025 Filing 5 RELEASED FROM MEDIATION The briefing schedule previously set by the court remains in effect. [Entered: 10/06/2025 01:51 PM]
September 2, 2025 Filing 4 MEDIATION ORDER (text only). The briefing schedule is amended as follows: Opening Brief Due (Appellant) 10/21/2025, Answering Brief Due (Appellee) 11/20/2025, Optional Reply Brief (Appellant) due within 21 days from the service date of the answering brief. [Entered: 09/02/2025 03:02 PM]
August 15, 2025 Filing 3 Amended Notice of Appeal Received. [Entered: 08/15/2025 10:09 AM]
August 12, 2025 Filing 2 SCHEDULE NOTICE. Appeal Opening Brief (No Transcript Due) (Appellant) 9/22/2025, Appeal Answering Brief (No Transcript Due) (Appellee) 10/21/2025. For appeal no. 25-5072, 3:23-cv-00266-LL-MSB. All briefs shall be served and filed pursuant to FRAP 31 and 9th Cir. R. 31-2.1. Failure of the petitioner(s)/appellant(s) to comply with this briefing schedule will result in automatic dismissal of the appeal. See 9th Cir. R. 42-1. [Entered: 08/12/2025 10:35 AM]
August 12, 2025 Filing 1 CASE OPENED. A copy of your notice of appeal / petition filed in 3:23-cv-00266-LL-MSB has been received in the Clerk's office of the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. The U.S. Court of Appeals docket number 25-5072 has been assigned to this case. All communications with the court must indicate this Court of Appeals docket number. Please carefully review the docket to ensure the name(s) and contact information are correct. It is your responsibility to alert the court if your contact information changes. Resources Available For more information about case processing and to assist you in preparing your brief, please review the Case Opening Information (for #attorneys and #pro se litigants) and review the #Appellate Practice Guide. Attorneys should consider contacting the court's #Appellate Mentoring Program for help with the brief and argument. [Entered: 08/12/2025 10:31 AM]

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: Stewart v. City of Carlsbad, et al.
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: LINDSEY STEWART
Represented By: Lindsey Stewart
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: CITY OF CARLSBAD
Represented By: Mr. Daniel Stephen Modafferi
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: DOES 1-10
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: CARLSBAD POLICE DEPARTMENT
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: Carlsbad Police Chief WILLIAMS
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.


Why Is My Information Online?