Daniel Hawk v. Rebecca Burr, et al
| DANIEL D. HAWK |
| REBECCA BURR and DIANE BAKER, Superintendent, US Dept of Interior, Bureau of Indian Affairs |
| 22-1526 |
| March 31, 2022 |
| U.S. Court of Appeals, Seventh Circuit |
| Other Civil Rights |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on May 3, 2022. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 11
ORDER re: Motion to pend case because appellant is POA for the Mae Jordan Property. [ # 10 ] IT IS ORDERED that the motion is DENIED. Briefing in this appeal will proceed as follows: Appellant's brief due on or before 06/09/2022 for Daniel D. Hawk. Appellees' briefs due on or before 07/11/2022 for Diane Baker and Rebecca Burr. Appellant's reply brief, if any, is due on or before 08/01/2022 for Appellant Daniel D. Hawk. NER [11] [7233709] [22-1526] (AP) [Entered: 05/03/2022 01:59 PM]
|
| Filing 10 Motion filed by Appellant Daniel D. Hawk for stay To provide the BIA time to review Plaintiff-Appellant Power of Attorney for the Mae Jordan property that ought to effectively estop eviction. Stopping eviction or in the alternative to create an agreement is judicially prudent to save judicial resources.. [10] [7233289] [22-1526] (Hawk, Daniel) [Entered: 05/02/2022 12:41 PM] |
|
Filing 9
ORDER re: Motion to proceed on appeal in forma pauperis.A review of the docket indicates that the appellants in forma pauperis status carried over for purposes of appeal. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that the motion is DENIED as unnecessary. [ # 8 ] CMD [9] [7230989] [22-1526] (AP) [Entered: 04/20/2022 03:50 PM]
|
| Filing 8 Prose motion filed by Appellant Daniel D. Hawk to proceed on appeal in forma pauperis. [8] [7230960] [22-1526] (LCP) [Entered: 04/20/2022 03:02 PM] |
| Filing 7 Docketing Statement filed by Appellee Diane Baker. Prior or Related proceedings: No. [7] [7229792] [22-1526] (Larsen, Christian) [Entered: 04/14/2022 10:38 AM] |
|
Filing 6
ORDER re: Indigent and homeless petitioner motion for ECF. [ # 3 ] The motion is GRANTED. Appellant Daniel Hawk is granted leave to use the Electronic Case Filing system for filing material in this appeal. This courts Electronic Case Filing Procedures, the Electronic Case Filing User Manual, and answers to frequently asked questions regarding Electronic Case Filing are available at the Seventh Circuits web site: http://www.ca7.uscourts.gov. The court will terminate Hawks electronic-filing user status upon the termination of the case, upon the termination of his pro se status, or for any abuse of filing privileges. NER [6] [7229109] [22-1526] (PS) [Entered: 04/12/2022 10:58 AM]
|
| Filing 5 Docketing Statement filed by Appellant Daniel D. Hawk. Prior or Related proceedings: Yes. 22-1579 [5] [7228782] [22-1526]--[Edited 04/12/2022 by JR.]--[Edited 04/12/2022 by JR] (CAG) [Entered: 04/11/2022 02:32 PM] |
| Filing 4 Filed Seventh Circuit Transcript Information Sheet by Appellant Daniel D. Hawk. [4] [7228780] [22-1526] (CAG) [Entered: 04/11/2022 02:31 PM] |
| Filing 3 Pro se motion filed by Appellant Daniel D. Hawk to become an electronic filer. [3] [7228778] [22-1526] (CAG) [Entered: 04/11/2022 02:30 PM] |
| Filing 2 Appearance form filed by Attorney Chris R. Larsen for Appellee Diane Baker. [2] [7226822] (L-Yes; E-Yes; R-No) [22-1526] [Edited 04/01/2022 by CG to reflect the termination and addition of counsel.] (Larsen, Christian) [Entered: 04/01/2022 12:41 PM] |
| Filing 1 U.S. civil case docketed. IFP. Docketing Statement due for Appellant Daniel D. Hawk by 04/07/2022. Transcript information sheet due by 04/14/2022. Appellant's brief due on or before 05/10/2022 for Appellant Daniel D. Hawk. [1] [7226798] [22-1526] (HTP) [Entered: 04/01/2022 11:29 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.
