Hooker v. Secretary, Department of Veterans Affairs
| Carlton Eugene Hooker, Jr. |
| Secretary, Department of Veterans Affairs |
| 8:2022mc00012 |
| April 25, 2022 |
| US District Court for the Middle District of Florida |
| William F Jung |
| Anthony E Porcelli |
| Other Statutes: Administrative Procedures Act/Review or Appeal of Agency Decision |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1345 VA Property Ejectment |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on June 9, 2022. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 16 MOTION to Reopen Case by Carlton Eugene Hooker, Jr. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit 1, #2 Exhibit 2)(BD) |
Filing 15
ENDORSED ORDER dismissing case is nonjusticiable. The Clerk will close this matter and terminate all pending motions/filings. Signed by Judge William F. Jung on 6/1/2022. (Jung, William)
|
|
Filing 14
ENDORSED ORDER No Action #13 Motion request for records check. The authority movant cites to compel the District Court to order the Clerk to undertake an inspection of records is a state statute that does not apply in federal court. The Case is, therefore, nonjusticiable in this forum. Signed by Judge William F. Jung on 6/1/2022. (Jung, William)
|
| Filing 13 MOTION for records check in accordance with Fla.Stat.943.053 by Carlton Eugene Hooker, Jr. (AG) |
| Filing 12 FOURTH MOTION to Disqualify Judge by Carlton Eugene Hooker, Jr. (Attachments: #1 Exhibits 1 and 2, #2 Docket Sheet)(BD) |
|
Filing 11
ENDORSED ORDER finding as moot #10 Motion to Disqualify Judge / Juror. See Doc. 9. Signed by Judge William F. Jung on 5/24/2022. (Jung, William)
|
| Filing 10 MOTION to Disqualify Judge by Carlton Eugene Hooker, Jr. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit 1, #2 Exhibit 2)(BD) (Additional attachment(s) added on 5/19/2022: #3 Docket Sheet) (BD). Modified on 5/19/2022 to add Exhibit (BD). |
|
Filing 9
ENDORSED ORDER denying #8 Motion. The Motion requests recusal under 28 U.S.C. 455. The Court has reviewed the statute and this record. No proper grounds for recusal are stated or evident in this record. See Jenkins v. Anton, 922 F.3d 1257, 1271 (11th Cir. 2019); Liteky v. United States, 510 U.S. 540, 555 (1994)("[J]udicial rulings alone almost never constitute a valid basis for a bias or partiality motion"). If movant wishes to pursue this matter, he may comply fully with the notation at Doc. 5 within ten days, in default of which the Court will dismiss and close this file. Signed by Judge William F. Jung on 5/17/2022. (Jung, William)
|
| Filing 8 MOTION Requesting Relief from Endorsed Order Denying Records Check Request Pertaining to Closed Cases and MOTION to Disqualify Judge for Fraud On/Upon the Court by Carlton Eugene Hooker, Jr. (BD) |
|
Filing 7
ENDORSED ORDER denying #6 Motion. The Motion states no proper grounds for relief under Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(a). The Court is unaware of a rule or statute providing for a District Judge to undertake a "records check" for a litigant concerning issues that arose in three closed cases that were handled by another District Judge. Signed by Judge William F. Jung on 5/13/2022. (Jung, William)
|
| Filing 6 MOTION Requesting Relief from Endorsed Order Denying Records Check Request Pertaining to Closed Cases Under Rule 60(a) by Carlton Eugene Hooker, Jr. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit 1, #2 Exhibit 2, #3 Exhibit 3)(BD) |
|
Filing 5
ENDORSED ORDER denying without prejudice #1 Motion. Movant may refile his "request for a records check," but such a refiled motion should provide a full citation to the specific Rule or Statute which entitles a litigant to such a "records check," and imposes this records check as a matter of first impression upon a United States District Court, outside of the discovery process in a filed, pending law suit when no such law suit is pending. Signed by Judge William F. Jung on 5/12/2022. (Jung, William)
|
| Filing 4 NOTICE of a related action per Local Rule 1.07(c) by Carlton Eugene Hooker, Jr. Related case(s): Yes (BD) |
| Filing 3 NOTICE of Pendency of Other Actions by Carlton Eugene Hooker, Jr. Related case(s): Yes (BD) |
| FEES Paid by Carlton Eugene Hooker, Jr. (Filing fee $49.00, Receipt Number TPA066369). (ARC) Modified text on 5/2/2022 (JNB). |
| Filing 2 NOTICE to Carlton Hooker, Jr. that the filing fee is required for the Clerk of Court to initiate a miscellaneous case. File the filing fee or a motion to proceed in forma pauperis. (Signed by Deputy Clerk). (JNB) |
| Filing 1 MOTION for Miscellaneous Relief, specifically records check request re: criminal charges against Carlton Hooker, Jr. by Carlton Eugene Hooker, Jr. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit)(JNB) |
Access additional case information on PACER
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
Access this case on the Florida Middle District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
| Search for this case: Hooker v. Secretary, Department of Veterans Affairs | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Plaintiff: Carlton Eugene Hooker, Jr. | |
| 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: Secretary, Department of Veterans Affairs | |
| 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.
