Rossi

Ran across specific `mo` opinions without text. Some examples: [1](https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/4895776/walter-jack-staten-v-state-of-missouri/?q=court_id%3Amo&type=o&order_by=dateFiled%20desc&filed_after=01%2F17%2F2020&filed_before=07%2F06%2F2021), [2](https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/4895777/elad-gross-v-michael-parson/?q=court_id%3Amo&type=o&order_by=dateFiled%20desc&filed_after=01%2F17%2F2020&filed_before=07%2F06%2F2021), [3](https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/4891971/michael-holmes-v-sarah-steelman-and-eric-schmitt/?q=court_id%3Amo&type=o&order_by=dateFiled%20desc&filed_after=01%2F17%2F2020&filed_before=07%2F06%2F2021). The original and backup files do have text

@quevon24 I reviewed all the matches for both files, and they all look OK I validated the matches manually, by looking at the OpinionCluster fields vs the matched fields, it's...

@flooie asked to look into this, and there is a situation when `auto_now` and `auto_now_add` can fail, even when using `Docket(...).save()` From the Django [docs](https://docs.djangoproject.com/en/5.0/ref/models/instances/#specifying-which-fields-to-save) on `.save()` > Field.pre_save() and...

Since this is causing trouble to the tenn court users we could patch it while we request for help in the Django groups. I think this PR should be enough...

Commands to fill the gap: ``` docker exec -it cl-django python /opt/courtlistener/manage.py cl_back_scrape_opinions --courts juriscraper.opinions.united_states.administrative_agency.olc --backscrape-start=01/16/2020 --backscrape-end=07/06/2021` ``` ``` docker exec -it cl-django python /opt/courtlistener/manage.py cl_back_scrape_opinions --courts juriscraper.opinions.united_states.administrative_agency.olc --backscrape-start=10/21/2013 --backscrape-end=06/16/2014`...

After running the backscraper, we found that the opinions are actually in the DB, but they do not appear when searching. The CL [search](https://www.courtlistener.com/?q=court_id%3Aolc&type=o&order_by=dateFiled%20asc&stat_Published=on&filed_after=01%2F18%2F2020&filed_before=07%2F05%2F2021) returns no result, but all the...

Environmental and Civil sub courts have the most data. I have condensed the date ranges so as to make it easier for Ramiro to run The commands to fill these...

Had to add more runs for civil due to some calls exceeding the page size of 25. But now everything is complete, close to the estimates except for duplicates ```...

The command to fill this specific gap (once the backscraper PR is merged on CL) ``` docker exec -it cl-django python /opt/courtlistener/manage.py cl_back_scrape_opinions --courts juriscraper.opinions.united_states.state.sd --backscrape-start=2019 --backscrape-end=2022 ```

Just checked the counts, we have filled the gaps. 73 for 2020, 69 for 2021, 81 for 2022 [142 for 2019](https://www.courtlistener.com/?q=court_id%3Asd&type=o&order_by=dateFiled%20desc&stat_Published=on&filed_after=01%2F01%2F2019&filed_before=12%2F31%2F2019) (should be 67). However, we have some new data...