Skip to main content

Appeal deadlines and court records

Gilmore v. Walmart

Updated Nov 12, 2026

In brief

Where it stands
Dismissed

Petition denied.

What it’s about
Bridget Gilmore asked the Supreme Court to review her claims that the Fifth Circuit mishandled her appeal in a Title VII case against Walmart and that her lawyer’s abandonment justified reopening the judgment.
Who it affects
The Supreme Court’s refusal ended Gilmore’s request for review in this proceeding without deciding whether the Fifth Circuit handled her claims properly.

Summary: written with AI from the case record.

Illustration for Bridget Gilmore, Petitioner v. Walmart, Incorporated
Conceptual illustration · AI-generated

What it's about

The Court refused to hear the case (denied review), so it did not decide whether her claims were correct.

Gilmore argued that her lawyer abandoned her and that this justified reopening the judgment.

The underlying case was a Title VII civil-rights dispute between Gilmore and Walmart.

Question presented

1. Whether a federal appellate court violates procedural due process and structural integrity when administrative personnel exceed their ministerial authority under Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure 25 and 27 by retroactively altering and backdating an official electronic docket, thereby artificially defeating the statutory tolling effects of a pro se litigant ’ s timely post-judgment motions under Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 4. 2. Whether a federal appellate court denies procedural due process under Mathews v. Eldridge and departs from the accepted course of judicial proceedings by affirming a summary dismissal of Title VII civil rights claims based exclusively upon unauthenticated, extra-record submissions, while completely suppressing a pro se litigant ’ s certified Record on Appeal — which contained exculpatory witness and law enforcement records — in violation of Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 10. 3. Whether gross attorney abandonment and constructive fraud constitute "extraordinary circumstances" under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b)(6), severing the principal agent relationship and entitling an innocent, self-represented litigant to relief from judgment, an issue over which the federal circuits are deeply divided.

Documents

1

Docket activity

6
  • New analysis added

    Nov 12, 2026 · Court records

  • AI analysis generated: Case Briefing

    Nov 12, 2026 · Generated

  • AI analysis generated: Decision Record

    Nov 12, 2026 · Generated

  • Case data updated: summary, question_presented, generation_metadata

    Nov 12, 2026 · Court records

  • Case data updated: question_presented, extraction_metadata

    Nov 12, 2026 · Court records

Show 1 more
  • Brief added: Petition

    Jun 22, 2026 · Court records

Sources

Primary materials plus reporting. Best-effort analysis: this explainer relies on a mix of primary materials and trusted secondary sources. Official filings and opinions remain authoritative.

Checked Nov 12, 2026Methodology

Court records and filings

Reporting and analysis