Andrews v. Christensen
| Sylvester Andrews |
| David Christensen |
| 22-136 |
| January 21, 2022 |
| U.S. Court of Appeals, Second Circuit |
| PRISONER PET-Habeas Corpus |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on February 23, 2022. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 17 CURED DEFECTIVE MOTION, TO PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS, [ # 14 ], on behalf of Appellant Sylvester Andrews, FILED.[3265871] [22-136] [Entered: 02/23/2022 10:36 AM] |
| Filing 14 MOTION, to proceed in forma pauperis, on behalf of Appellant Sylvester Andrews, FILED. Service date 02/09/2022 by US mail.[3265055] [22-136] [Entered: 02/22/2022 12:33 PM] |
| Filing 13 FORM D-P, on behalf of Appellant Sylvester Andrews, FILED. Service date 02/09/2022 by US mail.[3265048] [22-136] [Entered: 02/22/2022 12:29 PM] |
| Filing 12 ACKNOWLEDGMENT AND NOTICE OF APPEARANCE FORM, on behalf of Party Sylvester Andrews, FILED. Service date 02/09/2022 by US mail.[3265047] [22-136] [Entered: 02/22/2022 12:28 PM] |
Filing 11
ORDER, dated 02/14/2022, dismissing appeal by 03/07/2022, unless Appellant Sylvester Andrews, submits Form D-P, copy to pro se appellant, FILED.[3260364] [22-136] [Entered: 02/14/2022 10:46 AM]
|
|
Filing 10
ORDER, dated 02/14/2022, dismissing appeal by 03/07/2022, unless Appellant Sylvester Andrews, submits an Acknowledgment and Notice of Appearance Form, copy to pro se appellant, FILED.[3260358] [22-136] [Entered: 02/14/2022 10:41 AM]
|
| Filing 9 LR 31.2 SCHEDULING NOTIFICATION, on behalf of Appellant Sylvester Andrews, informing Court of proposed due date 03/10/2022, RECEIVED. Service date 02/06/2022 by US mail.[3259299] [22-136] [Entered: 02/10/2022 04:21 PM] |
| Filing 8 DEFECTIVE DOCUMENT, Motion, to proceed in forma pauperis, [7], on behalf of Appellant Sylvester Andrews, copy to pro se appellant, FILED.[3252591] [22-136] [Entered: 01/31/2022 11:55 AM] |
| Filing 7 MOTION, to proceed in forma pauperis, on behalf of Appellant Sylvester Andrews, FILED. Service date 01/18/2022 by US mail.[3252586] [22-136] [Entered: 01/31/2022 11:54 AM] |
| Filing 5 INSTRUCTIONAL FORMS, to Pro Se litigant, SENT.[3248561] [22-136] [Entered: 01/24/2022 12:38 PM] |
| Filing 4 ELECTRONIC INDEX, in lieu of record, FILED.[3248558] [22-136] [Entered: 01/24/2022 12:37 PM] |
| Filing 3 DISTRICT COURT JUDGMENT, dated 01/11/2022, RECEIVED.[3248557] [22-136] [Entered: 01/24/2022 12:37 PM] |
| Filing 2 DISTRICT COURT DECISION AND ORDER, dated 01/11/2022, RECEIVED.[3248555] [22-136] [Entered: 01/24/2022 12:36 PM] |
| Filing 1 NOTICE OF PRISONER APPEAL, with district court docket, on behalf of Appellant Sylvester Andrews, FILED. [3248546] [22-136] [Entered: 01/24/2022 12:32 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: Andrews v. Christensen | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Petitioner / appellant: Sylvester Andrews | |
| Represented By: | Sylvester Andrews |
| 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 ] |
| Respondent / appellee: David Christensen | |
| 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.
