Kevin Von Feldt v. Kammi Pederson
| KEVIN MARK VON FELDT |
| KAMMI JANAE PEDERSON |
| 24-2636 |
| September 19, 2024 |
| U.S. Court of Appeals, Seventh Circuit |
| Other Contract Actions |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on November 12, 2024. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 14
ORDER: On consideration of the papers filed in this appeal and review of the short record, this appeal is DISMISSED. Appellant seeks to appeal the district courts August 15, 2024, order dismissing the case because the parties jointly stipulated to dismissal in light of a settlement. When a party voluntarily dismisses a case, that party is not aggrieved and may not appeal from the order accepting the voluntary dismissal. See Levy v. W. Coast Life Ins. Co., 44 F.4th 621, 626 (7th Cir. 2022); Lush v. Bd. of Trustees of N. Illinois Univ., 29 F.4th 377, 380 (7th Cir. 2022); Hudson v. Chicago Tchrs. Union, Loc. No. 1, 922 F.2d 1306, 1312 (7th Cir. 1991) (A settlement is not appealable.). Nor may a plaintiff use any dispute he may have with his lawyer as a basis to reopen his case against defendant. See Stanciel v. Gramley, 267 F.3d 575, 581 (7th Cir. 2001). Ilana Diamond Rovner, Circuit Judge; Thomas L. Kirsch II, Circuit Judge and John Z. Lee, Circuit Judge. [14] [7417214] [24-2636] (FP) [Entered: 11/12/2024 03:21 PM]
|
| Filing 13 Filed Reply by Appellant Kevin Mark Von Feldt to appellees response to memorandum opposing dismissal. (Forwarded from the District Court) [13][7412201] [24-2636] (PS) [Entered: 10/18/2024 12:41 PM] |
| Filing 12 Docketing Statement filed by Appellant Kevin Mark Von Feldt. Prior or Related proceedings: No. [12] [7411816] [24-2636] (AP) [Entered: 10/17/2024 09:21 AM] |
| Filing 11 Filed notice from the District Court that the appeal docketing fee was received. [11] [7411758] [24-2636] (CAG) [Entered: 10/16/2024 04:29 PM] |
| Filing 10 Filed Certificate of Service to Appellee's Response to Memorandum Opposing Dismissal of Appeal for Lack of Jurisdiction filed on 10/15/2024 by Appellee Kammi Janae Pederson. [10] [7411126] [24-2636] (Hunt, Kay) [Entered: 10/15/2024 10:00 AM] |
| Filing 9 Filed Response by Attorney Kay Nord Hunt to Appellant's Memorandum Opposing Dismissal of Appeal for Lack of Jurisdiction. [9][7411124] [24-2636] (Hunt, Kay) [Entered: 10/15/2024 09:58 AM] |
| Filing 8 Filed Certificate of Service to Circuit Rule 26.1 Disclosure Statement and Appearance filed on 10/14/2024 by Appellee Kammi Janae Pederson. [8] [7411067] [24-2636] (Hunt, Kay) [Entered: 10/15/2024 09:00 AM] |
| Filing 7 Circuit Rule 26.1 Disclosure Statement and Appearance filed by Attorney Kay Nord Hunt for Appellee Kammi Janae Pederson. [7] [7411027] (L-Yes; E-Yes; R-No) [24-2636]-[Edited 10/15/2024 by VG - to reflect addition of counsel] (Hunt, Kay) [Entered: 10/14/2024 10:21 AM] |
|
Filing 6
ORDER re: Request to delay payment of fees. [ # 4 ] To the extent that the appellant seeks an extension of time, the request is GRANTED only to the extent that the appellant shall either pay the $605.00 appellate filing fees or file a motion for leave to proceed on appeal in forma pauperis in the district court by October 17, 2024. The appellant shall file his overdue Circuit Rule 3(c) docketing statement by October 17, 2024. CDH [6] [7409312] [24-2636] (CG) [Entered: 10/04/2024 08:58 AM]
|
|
Filing 5
ORDER: Appellee shall file, on or before October 15, 2024, a response to appellants jurisdictional memorandum, addressing the jurisdictional issue raised in the courts order of September 20, 2024. JXK [5] [7409168] [24-2636] (PS) [Entered: 10/03/2024 11:54 AM]
|
| Filing 4 Pro se motion filed by Appellant Kevin Mark Von Feldt to delay payment of fees. (Forwarded from the District Court) [4] [7409147] [24-2636] (PS) [Entered: 10/03/2024 11:05 AM] |
| Filing 3 Jurisdictional memorandum filed by Appellant Kevin Mark Von Feldt. (Forwarded from the District Court) [3] [7409144] [24-2636] (PS) [Entered: 10/03/2024 11:03 AM] |
|
Filing 2
ORDER: The appellant shall file, on or before October 4, 2024, a brief memorandum stating why this appeal should not be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. A motion for voluntary dismissal under Rule 42(b) of the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure will satisfy this requirement. Briefing is SUSPENDED pending further court order. (See order for details.) [2] [7406759] [24-2636] (CG) [Entered: 09/20/2024 02:09 PM]
|
| Filing 1 Private civil case docketed. Fee due. Transcript information sheet due by 10/03/2024. Docketing Statement due for Appellant Kevin Mark Von Feldt by 09/23/2024. Fee or IFP forms due on 10/03/2024 for Appellant Kevin Mark Von Feldt. [1] [7406677] [24-2636] (AD) [Entered: 09/20/2024 11:30 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.
| Search for this case: Kevin Von Feldt v. Kammi Pederson | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Defendant: KAMMI JANAE PEDERSON | |
| Represented By: | Joshua Feneis |
| Represented By: | Kay Nord Hunt |
| 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 ] |
| Plaintiff: KEVIN MARK VON FELDT | |
| Represented By: | Kevin Mark Von Feldt |
| 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.
