judyrecords

760 million+
United States Court Cases

District Of Columbia Court Of Appeals Record

P.M. V. HONORABLE LEE F. SATTERFIELD

Case Information: 05-OA-0013
Short Caption:	P.M. V. HONORABLE LEE F. SATTERFIELD	Classification:	Original Jurisdiction - Original Actions - Mandamus
Superior Court or Agency Case Number:	Not Specified	Filed Date:	03/09/2005

Opening Event Date:	03/09/2005	Case Status:	Closed
Record Completed:		Post-Decision Matter Pending:
Briefs Completed:
Argued/Submitted:
Disposition:		Next Scheduled Action:
Mandate Issued:

Party Information

Appellate Role

Party Name

IFP

Attorney(s)

Arguing Attorney

E-Filer

Petitioner

P.M. M

N

James W. Klein	N	Y
Jaclyn S. Frankfurt	N	Y

Respondent

Lee F. Saterfield

N

Pro Se

N

Respondent

District of Columbia

N

Edward E. Schwab

N

Y

Events
Event Date	Status	Description	Result
03/09/2005		PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS	Denied
03/09/2005		PETITIONER'S MOTION TO EXPEDITE APPEAL/Petition
03/09/2005		TMC - Petition for writ of mandamus - Petr's motion for expedited consideration
03/16/2005		ORDERED that respondent shall file a response to the petition within 20 days from the date of this order. F/O that the petition for writ of mandamus is hereby held in abeyance pending the filing of a response. (by: SCRZKG)
04/05/2005		RESPONDENT'S ANSWER/RESPONSE to writ of mandamus.
04/05/2005		RESPONDENT'S ANSWER/RESPONSE from corp counsel
04/06/2005		TMC - Petition for writ of mandamus - Respondent's answer to petition - Petr's reply to petition
04/06/2005		PETITIONER'S MISCELLANEOUS PROCEDURAL MOTION for leave to file a reply to response to writ of mandamus
04/06/2005		RECEIVED - Petitioner's reply to response to writ of mandamus
04/08/2005	Filed	OUTCOME/DISPOSITION - Outcome-Disposition
04/08/2005		ORDER GRANT PETR'S MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE REPLY and the Clerk shall file the lodged reply to the petition for writ of mandamus. * MORE *
04/08/2005		PETITIONER'S REPLY to respondent's response to the petition for writ of mandamus
04/08/2005		ORDER DENYING PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS since the issue raised, the right of Judge Puig-Lugo to retain this case for sentencing, is not clear and undisputable. See Banov v. Kennedy, 694 A.2d 850, 857 (D.C. 1996). F/O that the denial is without prejudice to petitioner filing a notice of appeal upon the conclusion of the disposition hearing and issuance of a final order. See People's Counsel for D.C. v. Public SErv. Common, 414 A.2d 516, 518 (D.C. 1980). (by: SCRZKG)