Doll Curtis v. City of Chicago
| DOLL CURTIS |
| CITY OF CHICAGO |
| 19-2757 |
| September 12, 2019 |
| U.S. Court of Appeals, Seventh Circuit |
| Other |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on October 30, 2019. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 9
ORDER: This court received notice from the District Court that the appellant paid the required docketing fee. Briefing will proceed as follows: Appellant's brief due on or before 11/29/2019 for Doll Curtis. Appellee's brief due on or before 12/30/2019 for City of Chicago. Appellant's reply brief, if any, is due on or before 01/20/2020 for Appellant Doll Curtis [9] [7040163] [19-2757] (CM) [Entered: 10/30/2019 08:12 AM]
|
| Filing 8 Filed notice from the District Court that the appeal $505 docketing fee was received. [8] [7040162] [19-2757] (CM) [Entered: 10/30/2019 08:10 AM] |
| Filing 7 Docketing Statement filed by Appellee City of Chicago. Prior or Related proceedings: No. [7] [7036343] [19-2757] (Kasper, Myriam) [Entered: 10/11/2019 02:33 PM] |
| Filing 6 Docketing Statement filed by Appellant Doll Curtis. Prior or Related proceedings: No. [6] [7036093] [19-2757] (AD) [Entered: 10/10/2019 03:09 PM] |
| Filing 5 Issued Circuit Rule 3(b) 14 day notice to file a motion for leave to proceed on appeal in forma pauperis or pay the docketing fee in the District Court. Fee or IFP forms due on 10/24/2019 for Appellant Doll Curtis [5] [7035965] [19-2757] (CG) [Entered: 10/10/2019 10:47 AM] |
| Filing 4 Appearance form filed by Attorney Elizabeth Mary Tisher for Appellee City of Chicago. [4] [7033886] (L-Yes; E-Yes; R-No) [19-2757] -[Edited 10/02/2019 by ER - added Attorney Elizabeth Mary Tisher to the court's docket] (Tisher, Elizabeth) [Entered: 10/01/2019 03:12 PM] |
|
Filing 3
ORDER: Appellant Doll Curtis is directed to file the overdue Docketing Statement within 14 days from the date of this Rule to Show Cause. Docketing statement response due for Appellant Doll Curtis by 10/10/2019. Sent Certified Mail. Receipt Number: 7017 2680 0001 1549 5855. [3] [7032804] [19-2757] (AD) [Entered: 09/26/2019 10:12 AM]
|
| Filing 2 Appearance form filed by Attorney MYRIAM ZRECZNY KASPER for Appellee City of Chicago. [2] [7031516] (L-Yes; E-Yes; R-Yes) [19-2757] [Edited 09/19/2019 by AG to reflect termination and addition of counsel] (Kasper, Myriam) [Entered: 09/19/2019 04:16 PM] |
| Filing 1 Private civil case docketed. Fee due. Fee or IFP forms due on 09/26/2019 for Appellant Doll Curtis. Docketing Statement due for Appellant Doll Curtis by 09/18/2019. Transcript information sheet due by 09/26/2019. [1] [7029854] [19-2757] (VG) [Entered: 09/12/2019 01:51 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: Doll Curtis v. City of Chicago | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Plaintiff / appellant: DOLL CURTIS | |
| Represented By: | Doll Curtis |
| 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 ] |
| Defendant / appellee: CITY OF CHICAGO | |
| Represented By: | Melanie P. Neely |
| Represented By: | Elizabeth Tisher |
| Represented By: | Myriam Z. Kasper |
| 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.
