Case Information: 06-CV-0210 | |||
Short Caption: | LENIR RICHARDSON V. MARY OURISMAN | Classification: | Appeals - Civil - Contracts |
Superior Court or Agency Case Number: | CAB1670-05 | Filed Date: | 02/17/2006 |
| |||
Opening Event Date: | 02/17/2006 | Case Status: | Closed |
Record Completed: | 04/07/2006 | Post-Decision Matter Pending: | |
Briefs Completed: | |||
Argued/Submitted: | |||
Disposition: | Next Scheduled Action: | ||
Mandate Issued: | 11/06/2006 | ||
Costs Waived |
Party Information | |||||||||||||||
Appellate Role | Party Name | IFP | Attorney(s) | Arguing Attorney | E-Filer | ||||||||||
Appellant | Lenir Richardson | Y | Pro Se | N | |||||||||||
Appellee | Mary Ourisman | N |
|
Events | ||||
Event Date | Status | Description | Result | |
02/17/2006 | NOTICE OF APPEAL | |||
03/16/2006 | On consideration of the notice of appeal filed in this case on February 17. 2006, and it appearing that appellant was granted in forma pauperis status in the trial court, and it further appearing that no transcript is needed for this appeal, it is ORDERED that a briefing order will be issued upon the filing in this court, by the Clerk of the Superior Court, of the record index and record copies in accordance with D.C. App. R. 11 (b)(3)(A). (GP) elp | |||
04/07/2006 | RECORD INDEX | |||
04/07/2006 | RECORD COPIES | |||
04/07/2006 | RECORD COMPLETED | |||
04/12/2006 | It appearing that the complete record on appeal has been filed with this court, it is ORDERED that appellant's brief and the limited appendix including the documents required by D.C. App. R. 30 (f), shall be filed within 40 days from the date of this order, and appellee's brief shall be filed within 30 days thereafter. See D.C. App. R. 31. (BY: GP) | |||
05/19/2006 | APPELLANT'S BRIEF *********STRUCK************* *******PER 7/18/06 ORDER******* LW | |||
05/22/2006 | APPENDIX - aplt | |||
05/26/2006 | AFFIDAVIT- of aplt in support of this appeal | |||
06/07/2006 | APPELLEE'S MOTION TO DISMISS/WITHDRAW APPEAL or alternatively for summary affirmance | |||
06/08/2006 | TMC - appellee's motion to dismiss OR for summary affirmance - *****appellee's AMENDED motion to dismiss or in the alternative motion for summary affirmance | |||
06/29/2006 | NOTICE RECEIVED - aple's counsel regarding motion for summary affirmance being returned by the postal service | |||
06/29/2006 | APPELLEE'S MOTION TO DISMISS/WITHDRAW APPEAL or alternatively for summary affirmance (amended) | |||
07/18/2006 | On consideration of appellee's motions to dismiss, CONSTRUED in part as a motion to strike appelalnt's brief, or alternatively for summary affirmance, it is ORDERED that appellee's motions, to the extent they REQUEST THAT APPELLANT'S BRIEF BE STRICKEN, ARE GRANTED and the Clerk shall STRIKE THE BRIEF OF APPELLANT. It is *****MORE***** | |||
07/18/2006 | FURTHER ORDERED that appellant shall, within 30 days from the date of this order, file a conforming brief. See d.C. App. R. 28 (a) & (e), 30(f) and 32. It is *****MORE***** | |||
07/18/2006 | FURTHER ORDERED that appellee's motions, to the extent they REQUEST DISMISSAL OF THE APPEAL, ARE DENIED. It is *****MORE***** | |||
07/18/2006 | FURTHER ORDERED that appellee's MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY AFFIRMANCE ARE HEREBY DENIED W/O PREJUDICE to renewal after appellant files a conforming brief. (GLFINE) | |||
08/15/2006 | APPELLANT'S BRIEF | |||
08/15/2006 | APPENDIX - aplt attached to brief | |||
09/18/2006 | APPELLEE'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY AFFIRMANCE | |||
09/19/2006 | TMC - appellee's RENEWED motion for summary affirmance - appellant's brief | |||
10/13/2006 | ORDERED that appellee's motion for summary affirmance IS GRANTED. See Beeton v. D.C., 779 A.2d 918, 923 (d.C. 2001) (quoting Crowley v. North American telecomms. Ass'n, 691 A.2d 1169, 1173 n.2 (D.C. 1997) (other citation omitted));... It is *****MORE***** | |||
10/13/2006 | FURTHER ORDERED and ADJUDGED that the order on appeal IS HEREBY AFFIRMED. (GLFINE) | |||
11/06/2006 | MANDATE ISSUED | |||
12/05/2006 | APPELLANT'S MISCELLANEOUS SUBSTANTIVE MOTION for CONSIDERATION/AGGRAVATION OF DAMAGES ****CONSTRUED AS A MOTION TO RECALL THE MANDATE LW | |||
12/06/2006 | TMC - appellant's motion for clarification | |||
12/14/2006 | ORDERED that appellant's MOTION IS DENIED as the arguments presented by appellant in her pleadings lack sufficient merit to warrant recalling the mandate. See Watson v. U.S., 536 A.2d 1056, 1060 (D.C. 1987)(en banc). (GLFINE) |