In Re: The Chaubunagungamaug Nipmuck Tribe
| CHAUBUNAGUNGAMAUG NIPMUCK TRIBE |
| 23-1696 |
| August 29, 2023 |
| U.S. Court of Appeals, First Circuit |
| Other Statutes |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on October 16, 2023. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| MOTION to Proceed Without Counsel and RESPONSE to order to show cause [ # 6593965-2 ], order to show cause [ # 6594235-2 ] filed by Appellant Chaubunagungamaug Nipmuck Tribe in 23-1696, 23-1741. [23-1696, 23-1741] (JW) [Entered: 10/17/2023 01:05 PM] |
| MOTION to consolidate cases. Cases to be consolidated: 23-1696, 23-1741 filed by Appellant Chaubunagungamaug Nipmuck Tribe in 23-1696, 23-1741. Certificate of service was not included. [23-1696, 23-1741] (JW) [Entered: 10/17/2023 12:54 PM] |
| MOTION to proceed in forma pauperis filed by Appellant Chaubunagungamaug Nipmuck Tribe in 23-1696, 23-1741. Certificate of service was not included. [23-1696, 23-1741] (JW) [Entered: 10/17/2023 12:49 PM] |
ORDER to Show Cause entered. This court has docketed petitioner-appellant Chaubunagungamaug Nipmuck Tribe's appeal from the district court's August 16, 2023 order denying petitioner's Motion for Evaluation of Legal Rights under 28 U.S.C. 1362 and Treaty Rights in Case No. 1:23-mc-91462-RGS (D. Mass.). Upon review, the notice of appeal may not be valid because it was signed by lay representative for petitioner, pro se, rather than by a lawyer. See 28 U.S.C. 1654 ("In all courts of the United States the parties may plead and conduct their own cases personally or by counsel... "); See Herrera Venegas v. Sanchez Rivera , 681 F.2d 41 (1st Cir. 1982) (lay person may only represent him or herself). Furthermore, even if the notice of appeal is valid, it would appear that the appeal may not proceed unless an attorney promptly enters an appearance. Cf. Instituto de Education Universal Corporacion v. U.S. Dep't of Education , 209 F.3d 18, 23-24 (1st Cir. 2000) (recognizing that a non-lawyer may not represent a corporation in on-going proceedings but concluding that a corporate officer may sign and file a notice of appeal, as long as the corporation then promptly retains counsel to take up the cudgels and prosecute the appeal). Accordingly, petitioner- appellant Chaubunagungamaug Nipmuck Tribe is ordered either to move for voluntary dismissal of the appeal pursuant to Fed. R. App. P. 42(b), or to show cause, in writing filed by October 17, 2023 why this appeal should be allowed to proceed. The deadline to pay the filing fee or to file a motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis is enlarged to October 17, 2023 . Failure to comply with this order will lead to dismissal of the appeal for lack of diligent prosecution. [23-1696]. CLERK'S NOTE: Docket entry was edited to modify the file date. (JW) [Entered: 09/26/2023 03:25 PM]
|
| CIVIL CASE docketed. Notice of appeal (doc. #9) filed by Appellant Chaubunagungamaug Nipmuck Tribe. Fee due 09/12/2023. [23-1696] (JW) [Entered: 08/29/2023 11:07 PM] |
Access additional case information on PACER
Access the Case Summary and Docket Report to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
| Search for this case: In Re: The Chaubunagungamaug Nipmuck Tribe | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Petitioner / appellant: CHAUBUNAGUNGAMAUG NIPMUCK TRIBE | |
| Represented By: | Chaubunagungamaug Nipmuck Tribe |
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Finance | [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
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.
