search tips
660 million+
United States Court Cases

District Of Columbia Court Of Appeals Record


Case Information: 11-CV-0559
Short Caption:DEV HILLMAN V. RESIDENTIAL FUNDING COMPANYClassification:Appeals - Civil - Landlord And Tenant
Superior Court or Agency Case Number:LTB12617-08Filed Date:04/19/2011

Opening Event Date:04/19/2011Case Status:Closed
Record Completed:Post-Decision Matter Pending:
Briefs Completed:
Disposition:Next Scheduled Action:
Mandate Issued:07/07/2011
Costs Waived

Party Information
Appellate RoleParty NameIFPAttorney(s)Arguing AttorneyE-Filer
AppellantDev Hillman YPro SeN
AppelleeResidential Funding CompanyN
Stephen O. HesslerNY

Event DateStatusDescriptionResult
05/18/2011 On consideration of the notice of appeal filed in this case on April 19, 2011, and it appearing that appellant was granted in forma pauperis status in the trial court, and it further appearing that transcript may be needed for this appeal, it is ORDERED that appellant shall within 10 calendar days from the date of this order, file with the Court Reporting Division a motion for preparation of transcripts of proceedings in the Superior Court, with notice to appellee(s), for determination in accordance with Hancock v. Mutual of Omaha Ins. Co., 472 A.2d 867 (D.C. 1984). See D.C. App. R. 10(b)(5)(A). The Court Reporting Division will submit the motion to the appropriate judge for a decision as to whether transcripts will be provided at no cost. It is FURTHER ORDERED that appellant shall simultaneously submit a file-stamped copy of that motion with this court. It is FURTHER ORDERED that appellant's failure to respond to any order of this court, including this order, shall subject this appeal to dismissal without further notice for lack of prosecution. See D.C. App. R. 13(a). (JAC) elp
06/15/2011 On consideration of this court's order of May 18, 2011, directing appellant to submit to this court a file-stamped copy of the motion for appeal transcript filed in the Superior court, within 10 calendar days from the date of the order, but it appearing that appellant has failed to comply with the order, it is ORDERED that this appeal is hereby dismissed. See D.C. App. R. 13. (ETW) elp