Lefloris Lyon v. USA
Appeal Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit, Case No. 17-2279

Tags No tags have been applied so far. Sign in to add some.
Last Updated February 22, 2019 at 2:10 AM EST (2.8 years ago) Request Update Request UpdateSpaceE-Mail Alert Get E-Mail Alerts

Space Space

Nature of Suit 2360 - Personal Injury: Other Personal
  Entries (10) Tab Overlap Calendar Events Tab Overlap Related (0) Tab Overlap Tools Right End
Save 25% on a pre-paid one year subscription.
Legal Document (Payment Possibly Required) 22 Filed: 10/11/2017, Entered: None Unknown Document Type
ORDER re: 1. To the Attention of the Court by Appellant. 2. Appellant Motion for Copy of Flash Drive. 3. Amended Notice of Appeal and Motion to Consolidate Dockets Nos. 17-2279, 17-2675, 17-2684. 4. Appellant's Amended Jurisdictional Memorandum Supporting the Motion for Recruitment of Counsel. 5. Motion for Reconsideration of the September 8, 2017 Order Supporting the Motion for Recruitment of Counsel Requesting Relief. 6. Motion to Take Judicial Notice Supporting the Motion for Recruitment of Counsel. 7. Response to Appellant's Motion for Copy of Flash Drive. The motions to reconsider the court's order dated September 8, 2017, are DENIED. He requests reconsideration of the order severing appeal nos. 17-2675 and 17-2684 and asks that these appeals be consolidated with appeal no. 17-2279. He further argues that he should have to pay only one filing fee for all three appeals. Appeal no. 17-2279 was dismissed for lack of jurisdiction on July 28, 2017, and Lyon offers no argument why this appeal should be reopened. Appeal nos. 17-2675 and 17-2684 are from two distinct district court cases. These cases were not consolidated in the district court and were filed two years apart. The only joint filing made in the two cases was when Lyon filed a notice of appeal that listed both district court cases. His request to reconsider the denial of leave to become an electronic filer also is DENIED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the motion for copy of flash drive is DENIED. The district court has placed the items filed before it under seal and transmitted the record to this court under seal. The court therefore will not provide a copy of the record on appeal to the appellant unless these items are placed in the public record by the district court. IT IS FINALLY ORDERED that the motion to take judicial notice is DENIED. These documents are not relevant to the issues on appeal. JKL [20] [18] [21] [6871782-2] [6866047-2] [22] [6875636] [17-2675, 17-2279, 17-2684] (MM)
    Request RequestSpace LREF
    Legal Document (Payment Possibly Required) 21 Filed: 9/26/2017, Entered: None Unknown Document Type
    Pro se motion filed by Appellant Mr. Lefloris Lyon to take judicial notice supporting the motion for recruitment of counsel. [21] [6871797] [17-2279, 17-2675, 17-2684] (JR)
      Request RequestSpace LREF
      Legal Document (Payment Possibly Required) 20 Filed: 9/26/2017, Entered: None Unknown Document Type
      Pro se motion filed by Appellant Mr. Lefloris Lyon for reconsideration of the September 8, 2017 order supporting the motion for recruitment of counsel requesting relief. [20] [6871796] [17-2279, 17-2675, 17-2684] (JR)
        Request RequestSpace LREF
        Legal Document (Payment Possibly Required) 19 Filed: 9/26/2017, Entered: None Unknown Document Type
        Amended jurisdictional memorandum supporting the motion for recruitment of counsel filed by Pro se Appellant Mr. Lefloris Lyon in 17-2279, 17-2675, 17-2684. [19] [6871792] [17-2279, 17-2675, 17-2684] (JR)
          Request RequestSpace LREF
          Legal Document (Payment Possibly Required) 18 Filed: 9/26/2017, Entered: None Unknown Document Type
          Amended notice of appeal and motion to consolidate dockets nos. 17-2279, 17-2675, 17-2684 filed by Pro se Appellant Mr. Lefloris Lyon. [18] [6871789] [17-2279, 17-2675, 17-2684] (JR)
            Request RequestSpace LREF
            Legal Document (Payment Possibly Required) 703073595 Filed: 9/19/2017, Entered: None Unknown Document Type
            FOR COURT USE ONLY: Certified copy of 07/27/2017 Final Order with the court's 09/19/2017 Mandate sent to the District Court Clerk. [6869985-2] [6869985] [17-2279] (ER)
              Request RequestSpace LREF
              Legal Document (Payment Possibly Required) 17 Filed: 9/19/2017, Entered: None Unknown Document Type
              Mandate issued. No record to be returned. [17] [6869977] [17-2279] (ER)
                Request RequestSpace LREF
                Legal Document (Payment Possibly Required) 16 Filed: 8/11/2017, Entered: None Unknown Document Type
                ORDER re: 1. Motion for additional time to petition for a writ of mandamus. 2. Motion to unseal exhibits to appellant's jurisdictional memorandum. The motion to extend time to file a petition for writ of mandamus is DENIED. As we previously explained, orders transferring a case to another federal district court are not final and generally are not appealable. See Hill v. Potter, 352 F.3d 1142, 1144 (7th Cir. 2003). And neither is a petition for writ of mandamus appropriate. Mandamus is not to be used as an ordinary vehicle to obtain relief from interlocutory orders. See Simmons v. City of Racine, PFC (Police & Fire Comm'n), 37 F.3d 325, 329 (7th Cir. 1994). Lyon should wait for a final judgment to appeal any legal rulings that he believes to be erroneous. The motion to unseal is DENIED as unnecessary. This case has already been closed. [14] [15] SAW [16] [6860986] [17-2279] (CR)
                  Request RequestSpace LREF
                  Legal Document (Payment Possibly Required) 15 Filed: 8/10/2017, Entered: None Unknown Document Type
                  Pro se motion filed by Appellant Mr. Lefloris Lyon to unseal exhibits to appellant's jurisdictional memorandum filed on 06/30/2017. [15] [6860630] [17-2279] (MM)
                    Request RequestSpace LREF
                    Legal Document (Payment Possibly Required) 14 Filed: 8/10/2017, Entered: None Unknown Document Type
                    Pro se motion filed by Appellant Mr. Lefloris Lyon for additional time to petition for a writ of mandamus. [14] [6860626] [17-2279] (MM)
                      Request RequestSpace LREF

                      Statistics

                      This case has been viewed 21 times.

                      No comments have been added yet. Sign in to post a comment.
                      Space
                      Issues Laws Cases Pro Articles Firms Entities
                      Issues Laws Cases Pro Articles Firms Entities
                       
                      PlainSite
                      Sign Up
                      Need Password Help?