Arthur Armstrong v. Philadelphia School District, et al
| WILLIG, WILLIAMS & DAVIDSON, PHILADELPHIA SCHOOL DISTRICT, CONSTANCE E. CLAYTON, Doctor, EDWARD WILLIAMS, ALBERT M. GENTIL, RUTH W. HAYRE, ANN G. WAITERS, CATHERINE M. REISMAN, ARNOLD S. OBLON, ARLENE B. HOLTZ, ARLENE ROBIN, ARMITA B. SIMS, HAROLD DIAMOND, NORRIS ELBRIDGE, PHILADELPHIA FEDERATION OF TEACHERS and HAROLD DIAMOND LAW |
| ARTHUR O. ARMSTRONG |
| 20-1199 |
| January 29, 2020 |
| U.S. Court of Appeals, Third Circuit |
| Other |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on March 10, 2020. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 8 SUPPLEMENTAL RESPONSE on behalf of Appellant Mr. Arthur O. Armstrong to Order to show cause show o issued. Clerk's Office made service on 03/11/2020. (SLC) [Entered: 03/11/2020 08:56 AM] |
| Filing 7 ECF FILER: LETTER from Attorney Linda M. Martin, Esq. for Appellees Philadelphia Federation of Teachers, Catherine M. Reisman and Willig, Williams & Davidson We will not be entering our appearance in this matter and the Federation will not participate in this Appeal.. Certificate of Service dated 02/12/2020. Service made by ECF. [20-1199] (LMM) [Entered: 02/12/2020 11:53 AM] |
| Filing 6 RESPONSE on behalf of Appellant Mr. Arthur O. Armstrong to Order to show cause. Certificate of Service dated 02/10/2020. Service made by ECF. (KR) [Entered: 02/10/2020 08:17 AM] |
| Filing 5 CLERK'S OFFICE QUALITY CONTROL MESSAGE: Clerk's case opening documents, record entry and order to show cause ERROR: Alan M. Rosen, Esq. was inadvertantly not added as counsel for Appellees. CORRECTION: Alan M. Rosen, Esq. has been added and electronic notices will be resent to ensure service up on all counsel. Deadlines for Alan M. Rosen, Esq. will be updated to 02/14/20. THIS MESSAGE IS FOR INFORMATIONAL PURPOSES ONLY. (SLC) [Entered: 01/31/2020 12:44 PM] |
Filing 4
ORDER On January 16, 2020, Arthur O. Armstrong filed a notice of appeal in the above-captioned case. He appeals from the district court's "decision of December 23, 2019" (though there is no such order entered on the district court's docket). This Court previously enjoined Mr. Armstrong from filing notices of appeal in certain cases without prior authorization. See Order Enjoining Filings, In re Armstrong, No. 05-8029 (3d Cir. Oct. 14, 2005); Order Enjoining Filings, Armstrong v. Sch. Dist., No. 97-1094 (3d Cir. Aug. 14, 1997). Because this appeal was not authorized and may be subject to the injunctions, Mr. Armstrong must SHOW CAUSE why this appeal should not be dismissed. His response to this order must be filed within twenty-one days of this order. (Notice of docket activity resent to ensure service upon ALL counsel of record.)--[Edited 01/31/2020 by SLC] (SLC) [Entered: 01/29/2020 10:19 AM]
|
| Filing 3 CM/ECF Partial record available on CM/ECF. (SLC) [Entered: 01/29/2020 10:15 AM] |
| Filing 2 Copy of duplicate notice of appeal filed in the district court on 01/18/2020 received from Clerk of District Court. (Notice of docket activity resent to ensure service upon ALL counsel of record.)--[Edited 01/31/2020 by SLC] (SLC) [Entered: 01/29/2020 10:14 AM] |
| Filing 1 CIVIL CASE DOCKETED. Notice filed by Appellant Mr. Arthur O. Armstrong in District Court No. 2-99-cv-00825. (Notice of docket activity resent to ensure service upon ALL counsel of record.)--[Edited 01/31/2020 by SLC] (SLC) [Entered: 01/29/2020 10:12 AM] |
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.
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.
