Case Information: 89-CV-0259 | |||
Short Caption: | EUGENE BEARD V. SOUTH MAIN BANK | Classification: | Appeals - Civil - Other Civil |
Superior Court or Agency Case Number: | CA271-88 | Filed Date: | 03/10/1989 |
| |||
Opening Event Date: | 03/10/1989 | Case Status: | Closed |
Record Completed: | 09/27/1989 | Post-Decision Matter Pending: | |
Briefs Completed: | 03/28/1990 | ||
Argued/Submitted: | 10/03/1990 | ||
Disposition: | Next Scheduled Action: | ||
Mandate Issued: | 09/11/1992 |
Party Information | |||||||||
Appellate Role | Party Name | IFP | Attorney(s) | Arguing Attorney | E-Filer | ||||
Appellant | Eugene Beard | N |
| ||||||
Appellee | South Main Bank | N |
|
Events | ||||
Event Date | Status | Description | Result | |
01/01/1901 | BEARD, EUGENE SOUTH MAIN BANK | |||
01/01/1902 | LTR FILED 1/29/92 | |||
01/01/1903 | NOTE - 01 9/1/89 ORD: DENY MO OF APLE NOTE - 01 FOR EXPEDITED REVIEW; GRANT NOTE - 02 MO OF APLE FOR LV TO FL CDR & NOTE - 02 CLK TO FL CDR; PARTIES TO MAKE NOTE - 03 ARNGMNTS TO HAVE REC FL. NOTE - 03 NOTE - 04 6/1/90 ORD: ON BEHALF OF MERIT NOTE - 04 DIV. THAT APLE'S MO. TO POST- NOTE - 05 PONE ARGUMENT IS GRANTED AND NOTE - 05 THIS APPEAL IS HEREBY REMOVED NOTE - 06 FROM THE REGULAR CALENDAR OF NOTE - 06 6/26/90 AT 9:30 A.M. THE CLK NOTE - 07 SHALL RESCHEDULE THIS APPEAL NOTE - 07 AS SOON AS CALENDAR PERMITS. | |||
01/01/1905 | TRDATE- 90/10/03 ACTION - ARG ATTY 1 - BATENP FOR - APPELLANT ATTY 2 - TETROV FOR - APPELLEE | |||
03/10/1989 | NOTICE OF APPEAL | |||
03/21/1989 | DESIGNATION OF RECORD AND SRT AD PANEL SCDATE 000000 SCHPRD | |||
03/21/1989 | APPELLANT'S DOCKETING STATEMENT AD PANEL SCDATE 000000 SCHPRD | |||
03/21/1989 | $50.00 DOCKETING FEE AD PANEL SCDATE 000000 SCHPRD | |||
03/29/1989 | $5 PAID TO DC TREASURER PANEL SCDATE 000000 SCHPRD | |||
07/31/1989 | MISCELLANEOUS PROCEDURAL MOTION OF APPELLEE FOR LEAVE TO FILE COUNTER-DESIGNATION OF RECORD RJG PANEL SCDATE 000000 SCHPRD | |||
08/14/1989 | APPELLEE'S MOTION TO EXPEDITE APPEAL OF APPEAL REVIEW AD PANEL SCDATE 000000 SCHPRD | |||
09/01/1989 | COUNTER DESIGNATION OF RECORD DAS PANEL SCDATE 000000 SCHPRD | |||
09/01/1989 | ORDER SEE NOTE FIELDS 01-03. DAS PANELRO SCDATE 050989 SCHPRD R | |||
09/27/1989 | ACTION SLIP MAILED GT PANEL SCDATE 000000 SCHPRD | |||
09/27/1989 | RECORD ON APPEAL GT PANEL SCDATE 100289 SCHPRD R | |||
09/27/1989 | RECORD COMPLETED | |||
10/16/1989 | APPELLEE'S MOTION TO EXTEND TIME TO FILE BRIEF TO 12-27-89 AD PANEL SCDATE 000000 SCHPRD | |||
11/06/1989 | APPELLANT'S MOTION TO EXTEND TIME TO FILE BRIEF TO DECEMBER 30, 1989 RJG PANEL SCDATE 110689 SCHPRD BA | |||
11/28/1989 | ORDER EXTG TIME FOR FILING BA TO AND INC. 12/30/89; BE DUE W/IN 30 DAYS THEREAFTER. FVH PANELRBH SCDATE 000000 SCHPRD | |||
12/26/1989 | APPELLANT'S MOTION TO EXTEND TIME TO FILE BRIEF TO JANUARY 15, 1990 AJ PANEL SCDATE 123089 SCHPRD BA | |||
01/16/1990 | RECEIVED APPELLANT'S BRIEF AD PANEL SCDATE 000000 SCHPRD | |||
01/24/1990 | APPELLANT'S BRIEF GW PANEL SCDATE 000000 SCHPRD | |||
01/24/1990 | ORDER GRANT MO TO FL APLT'S BRIEF; APLE'S BRIEF DUE IN 30 DAYS. GW PANELRBH SCDATE 011790 SCHPRD V | |||
02/28/1990 | RECEIVED APPELLEE'S BRIEF GT PANEL SCDATE 022390 SCHPRD BE | |||
03/06/1990 | APPELLEE'S MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE BRIEF (NUNC PRO TUNC) RJG PANEL SCDATE 031290 SCHPRD CHECK | |||
03/28/1990 | APPELEE'S BRIEF GW PANEL SCDATE 032290 SCHPRD V | |||
03/28/1990 | BRIEFS COMPLETED | |||
05/14/1990 | APPELLEE'S MOTION TO POSTPONE/CONTINUE ARGUMENT AJ PANEL SCDATE 000000 SCHPRD | |||
06/01/1990 | ORDER SEE NOTE FIELDS 4 THRU 7 SL PANELRBH SCDATE 051690 SCHPRD VS | |||
10/03/1990 | ARGUED PANELRGTEST SCDATE 000000 SCHPRD | |||
01/29/1992 | LETTER RE: TO ORAL ARGUEMENT. PR PANEL SCDATE 000000 SCHPRD | |||
08/21/1992 | REMANDED Order RM cause to trial court for further proceedings as set forth in opinion filed (RG TE ST) | |||
09/11/1992 | MANDATE ISSUED | |||
10/06/1992 | ORDER, sua sponte, that on page 20 of Judge Terry's concurring opinion in this case, filed August 21, 1992, lines 8 through 10 of the second full paragraph are amended to read as follows: would require further proceedings in the District of Columbia Courts. See D.C. Code Sec. 15-352 (1992 Supp.); Super. Ct. Civ. R. 72. This would be an additional burden for SMB, but it would not inconvenience Beard. (ROTEST) Printed @ p.2482-A |