Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Parse appellate docket attachments #753

Merged
merged 4 commits into from
Dec 31, 2024

Conversation

ttys0dev
Copy link
Contributor

Not entirely sure if these pacer_seq_no's are correct but they seem to follow a similar pattern to district courts at least.

Copy link
Member

@mlissner mlissner left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This looks generally good to me. @albertisfu when you have a moment (after Elastic and RECAP), can you take a look at this, please?

Copy link
Contributor

@albertisfu albertisfu left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@mlissner this looks good to me.

I just apply a refactor to move a couple of common methods to avoid duplicated code:

get_file_size_str_from_tr and get_input_value_from_tr, which were almost identical across appellate_docket, attachment_page, and docket_report.

I also added type hints and an additional test for a court that does not use entry numbers.

@mlissner mlissner merged commit 66a4522 into freelawproject:main Dec 31, 2024
7 checks passed
@mlissner
Copy link
Member

Thanks all! Merged!

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
Status: Done
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants