judyrecords
search tips
740 million+
United States Court Cases

District Of Columbia Court Of Appeals Record

WILLIAM A. VAN CROFT V. RUBY M. VAN CROFT

Case Information: 07-FM-1266
Short Caption:WILLIAM A. VAN CROFT V. RUBY M. VAN CROFTClassification:Appeals - Family - Other Family
Superior Court or Agency Case Number:CPO1625-07Filed Date:11/20/2007

Opening Event Date:11/20/2007Case Status:Closed
Record Completed:Post-Decision Matter Pending:
Briefs Completed:
Argued/Submitted:
Disposition:Next Scheduled Action:
Mandate Issued:01/10/2008

Party Information
Appellate RoleParty NameIFPAttorney(s)Arguing AttorneyE-Filer
AppellantWilliam A. Van Croft, IVNPro SeN
AppelleeRuby M. Van Croft NPro SeN

Events
Event DateStatusDescriptionResult
11/20/2007NOTICE OF APPEAL ******FILED PER 11/26/07 ORDER LW
11/20/2007RECEIVED - appellant's MOTION TO STAY EVICTION & CONTEMPT
11/20/2007RECEIVED - appellant's MOTION TO PROCEED IFP
11/26/2007TMC - appellant's motion for IFP - (LODGED) notice of appeal - (LODGED) motion to stay eviction & contempt
11/26/2007 ORDERED that appellant's MOTION TO PROCEED IFP IS GRANTED and the Clerk SHALL FILE the NOTICE OF APPEAL and LODGED motions. The Clerk SHALL also TRANSMIT a copy of the NOTICE OF APPEAL TO THE CLERK, Superior Court, to be filed and processed. It is *****MORE*****
11/26/2007APPELLANT'S MOTION TO PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS
11/26/2007APPELLANT'S MOTION FOR STAY
11/26/2007RECEIVED - appellant's motion to supplement the record
11/26/2007APLT MOTION FOR LEAVE TO SUPPLEMENT THE RECORD
11/26/2007 FURTHER ORDERED that appellant's MOTION TO STAY order pending appeal IS DENIED on the merits. It is ****MORE*****
11/26/2007 FURTHER ORDERED that appellant's MOTION TO SUPPLEMENT THE RECORD IS DENIED since the documents sought to include are not part of the proceeding on appeal. It is *****MORE*****
11/26/2007 FURTHER ORDERED that appellant shall, within 20 days from the date of this order SHOW CAUSE why this appeal should not be dismissed either for lack of jurisdiction as having been taken from a non-final order since the hearing on the motion for contempt is scheduled for November 28, 2007, or for lack of standing since appellant is not aggrieved as he entered a consent agreement. See Crane v. Crane, 614 A.2d 935, 939 (D.C. 1992); Beckwith v. Beckwith, 379 A.2d 955, 958 (D.C. 1977). (FATHBE)
11/26/2007TMC - OTSC
12/18/2007 ORDERED that THIS APPEAL IS HEREBY DISMISSED for lack of jurisdiction. See Crane v. Crane, 614 A.2d 935, 939 (D.C. 1992); Beckwith v. Beckwith, 379 A.2d 955, 958 (D.C. 1977). (FATHBE)
12/18/2007DISMISSED
01/10/2008MANDATE ISSUED