Boone v. Twenty-Ninth Judicial Circuit of Missouri et al
| Angie Lynn Boone |
| Twenty-Ninth Judicial Circuit of Missouri, Tracey D. Martin, Tina Longnecker and Angela Austin Vorhees |
| 8:2026cv02351 |
| August 13, 2026 |
| U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Florida |
| Natalie Hirt Adams |
| Thomas P Barber |
| Civil Rights: Other |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 Civil Rights Act |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on August 14, 2026. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 13
ENDORSED ORDER: Plaintiff's "Motion for Order Preserving Evidence" (Doc. #7) is denied. Plaintiff has not shown that a preservation order is needed due to any actual or imminent risk that any of the documents will be destroyed during the pendency of this action, especially where it appears that many of the categories of documents are readily available in the public record. Signed by Judge Thomas P. Barber on 8/14/2026. (RL)
|
|
Filing 12
ENDORSED ORDER: Plaintiff's "Motion for Appointment of Pro Bono Counsel Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1915(e)(1)" (Doc. #6) is denied. A plaintiff in a civil case has no constitutional right to appointed counsel, and appointment of counsel is warranted only in exceptional circumstances. No such exceptional circumstances are apparent at in this case. Indeed, Plaintiff herself acknowledges in her motion that she has demonstrated the ability to draft substantial legal filings, conduct legal research, and identify applicable federal precedent. In addition, the fact that Plaintiff purports to assert claims belonging to her minor children does not require the Court to appoint counsel to represent them. As explained in the Court's Order on Plaintiff's motion for appointment of a guardian ad litem, Plaintiff may not litigate her minor children's claims pro se. Signed by Judge Thomas P. Barber on 8/14/2026. (RL)
|
|
Filing 11
ENDORSED ORDER: Plaintiff's "Motion for Appointment of Guardian ad Litem for the Minor Children Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 17(c)" (Doc. #5) is denied. Although Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 17(c) provides mechanisms for protecting an unrepresented minor in federal litigation, it does not permit a non-attorney parent to litigate claims pro se on behalf of her minor children. See Devine v. Indian River Cnty. Sch. Bd., 121 F.3d 576, 581-82 (11th Cir. 1997), overruled in part on other grounds by Winkelman ex rel. Winkelman v. Parma City Sch. Dist., 550 U.S. 516 (2007). Nor would appointment of a guardian ad litem authorize Plaintiff to prosecute her children's claims without counsel. Accordingly, to the extent the complaint purports to assert claims belonging to Plaintiff's minor children, Plaintiff is warned that she may not litigate those claims on their behalf without an attorney. Signed by Judge Thomas P. Barber on 8/14/2026. (RL)
|
|
Filing 10
ENDORSED ORDER: Plaintiff's "Motion to Proceed Using Minor Children's Initials and to Restrict Identifying Information" (Doc. #8) is denied as moot to the extent Plaintiff seeks permission to use her minor children's initials and redact their full dates of birth. Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 5.2(a) already requires parties to use only a minor's initials and, when referring to an individual's birth date, only the year of birth. Plaintiff should comply with these requirements in all future filings. To the extent Plaintiff seeks to seal or otherwise restrict access to particular medical, school, therapy, child-welfare, or other sensitive records, she must file a motion identifying the specific information or document she seeks to protect and explaining why sealing or another restriction is warranted. The Court will consider any such request on a document-by-document basis, keeping in mind the public's right of access to judicial proceedings and the privacy protections already provided by Rule 5.2. Signed by Judge Thomas P. Barber on 8/14/2026. (RL)
|
|
Filing 9
ENDORSED ORDER: "Plaintiff's Motion to Seal Protected Medical, Mental-Health, and Child-Welfare Records/Entire Case" (Doc. #3) is denied. The public has a presumptive right of access to judicial proceedings and records, and Plaintiff has not established a basis for sealing this entire case. To the extent Plaintiff believes that a particular filing contains sensitive information warranting protection beyond the redactions required by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 5.2, she may file a motion identifying the specific document or information she seeks to protect and explaining why sealing or other restricted access is necessary. Plaintiff is warned, however, that the Court is highly unlikely to grant any request to seal absent a compelling justification that outweighs the public's right of access. The Clerk is directed to unseal this case and all documents presently filed on the docket. Signed by Judge Thomas P. Barber on 8/14/2026. (RL)
|
| Filing 8 MOTION to proceed using minor children's initials and to restrict identifying information by Angie Lynn Boone. (LSS) (Main Document 8 replaced on 8/17/2026) (JVC). |
| Filing 7 MOTION for order to preserving evidence by Angie Lynn Boone. (LSS) (Main Document 7 replaced on 8/17/2026) (JVC). |
| Filing 6 MOTION to Appoint Counsel by Angie Lynn Boone. (LSS) Motions referred to Magistrate Judge Natalie Hirt Adams. (Main Document 6 replaced on 8/17/2026) (JVC). |
| Filing 5 MOTION to Appoint Guardian ad Litem by Angie Lynn Boone. (LSS) (Main Document 5 replaced on 8/17/2026) (JVC). |
| Filing 4 MOTION for Preliminary Injunction by Angie Lynn Boone. (LSS) (Main Document 4 replaced on 8/17/2026) (JVC). |
| Filing 3 MOTION to Seal Case by Angie Lynn Boone. (LSS) (Main Document 3 replaced on 8/17/2026) (JVC). |
| Filing 2 MOTION to Proceed In Forma Pauperis / Affidavit of Indigency by Angie Lynn Boone. (LSS) Motions referred to Magistrate Judge Natalie Hirt Adams. (Main Document 2 replaced on 8/17/2026) (JVC). |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT against Tina Longnecker, Tracey D. Martin, Twenty-Ninth Judicial Circuit of Missouri, Angela Austin Vorhees with Jury Demand filed by Angie Lynn Boone.(LSS) (Main Document 1 replaced on 8/17/2026) (JVC). |
Access additional case information on PACER
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the U.S. Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
Access this case on the Florida Middle District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
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.
