in re Tevis
Larry Tevis and Nancy Tevis |
California Department of Veterans Affairs |
United States Trustee |
2:2009cv00316 |
February 4, 2009 |
US District Court for the Eastern District of California |
Bankruptcy Appeal (801) Office |
El Dorado |
Lawrence K. Karlton |
None |
Federal Question |
28:0158 Notice of Appeal re Bankruptcy Matter (BAP) |
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
Document Text |
---|
Filing 23 ORDER signed by Senior Judge Lawrence K. Karlton on 10/5/09. The Bankruptcy Court's decision of January 26, 2009, denying the motion to recuse, is AFFIRMED. CASE CLOSED. (Kaminski, H) |
Filing 16 ORDER denying 15 appellants' Motion to Stay, signed by Senior Judge Lawrence K. Karlton on 9/4/09. (Kastilahn, A) |
Filing 12 ORDER signed by Senior Judge Lawrence K. Karlton on 8/20/2009 ORDERING Appellee is hereby ORDERED TO SHOW CAUSE in writing by 9/14/2009 why sanctions should not issue in the above-captioned case in the amount of $150, as permitted by Local Rule 11-110, for the failure to file a timely opening brief; Appellee's opening brief SHALL be filed and served not later than ten (10) days from the date of this order; Hearing in this matter is set for 10/13/2009 at 10:00 AM in Courtroom 4 (LKK) before Senior Judge Lawrence K. Karlton. (Reader, L) Modified on 8/20/2009 (Reader, L). |
Filing 7 ORDER signed by Senior Judge Lawrence K. Karlton on 4/8/09 ORDERING appellants' motion to proceed in forma pauperis 6 is GRANTED. (Carlos, K) Modified on 4/9/2009 (Carlos, K). |
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
Access this case on the California Eastern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.