No. 23-1006

In Re Christopher Gary Baylor

Lower Court: N/A
Docketed: 2024-03-13
Status: Denied
Type: Paid
Response Waived
Tags: appeal civil-procedure civil-rights constitutional-rights due-process free-speech judicial-delay mandamus-jurisdiction right-to-appeal section-1657 standing
Key Terms:
DueProcess FirstAmendment JusticiabilityDoctri
Latest Conference: 2024-05-09
Question Presented (AI Summary)

Does relief become impliedly denied upon the expiration of time to grant or deny, and if no, when does absence of any judgment, ruling, decision, decree, or Order more than 550 days begin to trigger an appeal or review?

Question Presented (OCR Extract)

QUESTIONS PRESENTED Does relief become Does the district court impliedly denied upon when it refuses to enter the expiration of time for more than 550 days, : to grant or deny, and if any judgment, decision, no, when does absence ruling, decision, decree of any judgment, or Order chill speech or ruling, decision, decree, violate rights to appeal, or Order more than 550 petition or review? days begin to trigger an appeal or review? Does district court chill Does the district court speech or violate the usurp Section 1657 of right to be heard when U.S. Code, 28, when it without cause stays or refuses to exercise its holds in abeyance a inherent authority to case absent any Notice, expedite in civil cases, ruling, decision, Order, requests for immediate judgment or decree? injunctive relief? Does an appellate court Might this Court then violate Amendment 5 “stand in the shoes of when it first permits a the Court of Appeals,” response, then denies pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § that right when it then 1292(e), and § 2072(a) ; dismisses without first if the Eleventh Circuit allowing opportunity to would decline review first be heard on all pursuant to § 1292(a) arguments prior to the or exercise mandamus dismissal of an appeal? jurisdiction? i R.14(b)(i)

Docket Entries

2024-05-13
Petition DENIED.
2024-04-23
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 5/9/2024.
2024-03-20
Waiver of right of respondents Charles T. Canady, Ricky Polston, Jamie R. Grosshans, Jorge Labarga, John D. Couriel, Brian D. Lambert, F. Rand Wallis, James A. Edwards, Eric J. Eisnaugle, John M. Harris, Robert J. Morris, Jr., Craig C. Villanti, Suzanne Y. Labrit, Daniel H. Sleet, Anth to respond filed.
2024-03-07
Petition for a writ of mandamus and/or prohibition filed. (Response due April 12, 2024)

Attorneys

Charles T. Canady, Ricky Polston, Jamie R. Grosshans, Jorge Labarga, John D. Couriel, Brian D. Lambert, F. Rand Wallis, James A. Edwards, Eric J. Eisnaugle, John M. Harris, Robert J. Morris, Jr., Craig C. Villanti, Suzanne Y. Labrit, Daniel H. Sleet, Anth
Charles Joseph Finegan Schreiber Jr.Office of the Attorney General, State of Florida, Respondent
Charles Joseph Finegan Schreiber Jr.Office of the Attorney General, State of Florida, Respondent
In Re Christopher Gary Baylor
Christopher Gary Baylor — Petitioner
Christopher Gary Baylor — Petitioner