LIT COMMENTARY
This page regarding federal appeal 20-20209 Burke v Hopkins, 5th Cir., will be updated frequently.
Filed; July 6, 2020.
Appellants, Joanna Burke and John Burke (“Burkes”), now file a Motion to Stay Proceedings[1] for 4 [four] months or until the pending matters which affect this appeal are resolved. The Burkes rely upon the following facts:-
The lower court decided the case prematurely, (ROA.1116 –1266) and;
Dismissing the Burkes case in violation of an executive order[2] and in advance of an agreed postponement by the parties to reschedule the in-person court hearing – due to COVID-19 – thus denying the Burkes their constitutional rights to a fair hearing.[3] Rendering judgment punished[4] the Burkes by extending litigation to an appeal and increasing the Burkes injury-in-fact due to the additional time and delay to correct the order and remand the case to the lower court. Without appeal by the Burkes, Judge Hittner’s entry of judgment would have the effect of accelerating the current order of foreclosure issued by this court in Deutsche Bank Nat’l Tr. Co. v. Burke, 902 F.3d 548 (5th Cir. 2018), in violation of the due process clause. Carrying the judgment into effect is not a judicial act, it is a ministerial act[5], which violated Gov. Abbott’s executive order and;
The pending request for reconsideration with BODA (Supreme Court of Texas) re Mark Daniel Hopkins complaint, (EXHIBIT BODA) and;
The pending complaint against S.D. Texas Judge David Hittner (ROA.1167 – 1176) which includes a request for impeachment[6], and;
For the reasons stated in the related case against Ocwen, as per the third motion to stay filed with this court on July 5th, 2020 (EXHIBIT OCWEN).
Conclusion: Until such times as the pending filings and opinions are issued, the Burkes now request this court grants an expedited Motion to Stay Proceedings until the pending matters described above are ruled upon, OR in the alternative, stay proceedings for a period of no less than four months. The Motion to Stay Proceedings and Motion to Hold Case in Abeyance is not brought for the purpose of delay and therefore Appellants respectfully requests this court grants the joint Motion.
Respectfully submitted,
[1] See Consumer Fin. Prot. Bureau v. Source for Pub. Data, L.P., 903 F.3d 456 (5th Cir. 2018) “Accordingly, the district court ordered Public Data to respond to the CID, but this court granted a stay pending the resolution of this appeal.”
And; Burgess v. Fed. Deposit Ins. Corp., 871 F.3d 297 (5th Cir. 2017) “For the following reasons, we grant Burgess’s motion and stay the FDIC’s order pending resolution of the merits of the petition or further order of this court.”
And; Natl Federation of Indep Bus v. R. Acosta, Secretary LABR (17-10054) COURT ORDER granting motion to stay. Document 504035357, Jun 15, 2017.
[2] See In re Abbott, No. 20-50264 (5th Cir. Apr. 7, 2020) and; “The judicial power and the executive power over sentences are readily distinguishable. To render judgment is a judicial function. To carry the judgment into effect is an executive function.” – United States v. Benz, 282 U.S. 304, 311 (1931).
[3] See ROA.1171 referencing footnote 18 and the Burkes Complaint re Hittner in general; ROA.1169 – 1176.
[4] “The general rule is that judgments, decrees and orders are within the control of the court during the term at which they were made. They are then deemed to be “in the breast of the court” making them, and subject to be amended, modified, or vacated by that court. Goddard v. Ordway, 101 U.S. 745, 752… In the present case the power of the court was exercised to mitigate the punishment, not to increase it, and is thus brought within the limitation. Wharton, in Criminal Pl. and Pr., 9th ed., § 913, says: “As a general practice, the sentence, when imposed by a court of record, is within the power of the court during the session in which it is entered, and may be amended at any time during such session, provided a punishment already partly suffered be not increased.” United States v. Benz, 282 U.S. 304, 306-07 (1931).
[5] In discussing the independence of the Judiciary in his famous Lectures on Law, James Wilson, an Associate Justice of the Supreme Court, said this: “When the decisions of courts of justice are made, they must, it is true, be executed; but the power of executing them is ministerial, not judicial.” 1 JAMES WILSON, Of Government (1790), reprinted in COLLECTED WORKS OF JAMES WILSON 689, 703 (Kermit L. Hall & Mark David Hall eds., 2007).
[6] See; The branches of government have the power to correct one another’s legal errors. If Congress passes and the President signs a law, its constitutionality is not beyond question. Marbury v. Madison, 5 U.S. (1 Cranch) 137, 177 (1803). If an officer incorrectly exercises his statutory powers, he can be sued. – Little v. Barreme, 6 U.S. (2 Cranch) 170, 170 (1804). If the President commits a high crime or misdemeanor, he can be impeached – U.S. CONST. art. II, § 4. So can judges – 135 CONG. REC. H1811 (1989) and See Act, Section 354 – citing ROA.1173, footnote 31.
This. https://t.co/mMdK0ThOYQ@ClassActionLaw @statebaroftexas @SupremeCourt_TX @JudgeDillard @JusticeWillett @KannonShanmugam @roysimon @VolokhC @JoshMBlackman @josh_hammer @nytimes @blaw @law360 @VAStateBar @TheFlaBar @DC_Bar @scotxblog @ishapiro @Public_Justice @FedSoc pic.twitter.com/kqLKMqYiGb
— LawsInTexas (@lawsintexasusa) July 5, 2020
“These duties, we submit, although defined by statute as to the time and place of performance, are an integral part of the constitutional office of judge. For refusal to hold court as required by law, a judge may be impeached.”
Booth v. United States, 291 U.S. 339, 342 (1934)
| Associated Case | Short Title | Type | Start | End | Status |
| Originating Case | Lead Case | Filed | Execution Date | Judgment | NOA | Originating Judge | Court Reporter |
| 4:18-CV-4544 | 12/03/2018 | 04/18/2019 | Mathis, Ebonee S. | ||||
| 4:18-CV-4544 | 12/03/2018 | 04/18/2019 | Hittner, David |
| Party | Party Type | Terminated from Case | Attorney |
| Burke, Joanna | Plaintiff-Appellant | ||
| Burke, John | Plaintiff-Appellant | ||
| Ocwen Loan Servicing, L.L.C. | Defendant-Appellee | Hopkins,Shelley Luan Hopkins,Mark D. |
| Attorney | Party Type(s) Represented | Representation End |
| Hopkins, Mark D. | Defendant-Appellee | |
| Hopkins, Shelley Luan | Defendant-Appellee |
| General Docket United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit |
|
||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Joanna Burke v. Ocwen Loan Servicing, L.L.C. (19-20267)
Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Opinions Outside of RECAP Collection
- Smith v. Pohlmeier, 132 F.3d 1454 (5th Cir. 1997)
Nov. 21, 1997
Document Number
504925084
Apr 22, 2019
PRIVATE CIVIL FEDERAL CASE docketed. NOA filed by Appellants Ms. Joanna Burke and Mr. John Burke [19-20267] (CSG) [Entered: 04/22/2019 01:34 PM]
Main Doc
504925399
Apr 22, 2019
COURT REPORTER ACKNOWLEDGMENT received from Ebonee Mathis. [19-20267] (Ebonee S. Mathis ) [Entered: 04/22/2019 02:54 PM]
Main Doc
May 2, 2019
FEE PAID by Appellants Ms. Joanna Burke and Mr. John Burke. [19-20267] (CSG) [Entered: 05/02/2019 02:14 PM]
504940956
May 2, 2019
INITIAL CASE CHECK by Attorney Advisor complete, Action: Case OK to Process. [9043617-2] Initial AA Check Due satisfied.. Transcript order due on 05/17/2019 for Appellants Joanna Burke and John Burke [19-20267] (CSG) [Entered: 05/02/2019 02:20 PM]
Main Doc
504942292
May 3, 2019
APPEARANCE FORM for the court’s review. Lead Counsel? Yes. [19-20267] (Mark D. Hopkins ) [Entered: 05/03/2019 11:23 AM]
Main Doc
504942308
May 3, 2019
APPEARANCE FORM received from Ms. Shelley Luan Hopkins for Ocwen Loan Servicing, L.L.C. for the court’s review. Lead Counsel? No. [19-20267] (Shelley Luan Hopkins ) [Entered: 05/03/2019 11:26 AM]
Main Doc
May 3, 2019
APPEARANCE FORM FILED by Attorney Shelley Luan Hopkins for Appellee Ocwen Loan Servicing, L.L.C. in 19-20267 [19-20267] (DMS) [Entered: 05/03/2019 02:59 PM]
May 3, 2019
APPEARANCE FORM FILED by Attorney(s) Mark D. Hopkins for party(s) Appellee Ocwen Loan Servicing, L.L.C., in case 19-20267 [19-20267] (DMS) [Entered: 05/03/2019 03:00 PM]
504949063
May 8, 2019
MOTION filed by Appellants Ms. Joanna Burke and Mr. John Burke for leave to file electronically as a pro se party [9048328-2]. Date of service: 05/06/2019 Document is insufficient for the following reasons: Did not conference with the opposing side and the motion does not have a certificate of compliance. Sufficient Mtn/Resp/Reply due on 05/20/2019 for Appellants Joanna Burke and John Burke [19-20267] (DMS) [Entered: 05/08/2019 03:10 PM]
Main Doc
504949125
May 8, 2019
LETTER OF ADVISEMENT. Reason: Advising appellants they must file a transcript order form as stated in our letter of 5/2/2019. If one is not filed, the case will be dismissed for want of prosecution. [19-20267] (DMS) [Entered: 05/08/2019 03:20 PM]
Main Doc
504956003
May 14, 2019
TRANSCRIPT ORDER received from Appellants Ms. Joanna Burke and Mr. John Burke. DETAILS: Transcript Order: Court Reporter: Ebonee S. Mathis, Proceeding Type and Date: Hearing 02/06/2019. Transcript Order ddl satisfied. [19-20267] (DMS) [Entered: 05/14/2019 12:30 PM]
Main Doc
May 14, 2019
ACKNOWLEDGMENT Transcript Order: Court Reporter: Ebonee S. Mathis, Est. Completion Dt: 05/17/2019, Dt. Fin Arrangements Made: 04/19/2019, Dt. Trans. to be Filed: 05/17/2019, Proceeding Type and Date: Hearing 02/06/2019. Transcript Due/Court Reporter Discount Date is 05/17/2019 for Ebonee S. Mathis, Court Reporter [19-20267] (DMS) [Entered: 05/14/2019 12:31 PM]
May 28, 2019
TRANSCRIPT FILED IN DISTRICT COURT Transcript Order: Court Reporter: Ebonee S. Mathis, Dt. Filed in Dist. Ct: 05/17/2019 Transcript Due/Court Reporter Discount Date canceled [19-20267] (DMS) [Entered: 05/28/2019 07:28 AM]
May 28, 2019
ELECTRONIC RECORD ON APPEAL REQUESTED FROM DISTRICT COURT for 4:18-CV-4544. Electronic ROA due on 06/03/2019. [19-20267] (DMS) [Entered: 05/28/2019 07:28 AM]
504976331
May 30, 2019
CLERK ORDER granting appellants’ Motion for leave for pro se to file electronically filed by Appellants Ms. Joanna Burke and Mr. John Burke [9048328-2] [19-20267] (DMS) [Entered: 05/30/2019 10:58 AM]
Main Doc
Jun 5, 2019
ELECTRONIC RECORD ON APPEAL FILED. Exhibits on File in District Court? No. Electronic ROA deadline satisfied. [19-20267] (PAC) [Entered: 06/05/2019 01:31 PM]
504984542
Jun 5, 2019
BRIEFING NOTICE ISSUED A/Pet’s Brief Due on 07/15/2019 for Appellants Joanna Burke and John Burke. [19-20267] (PAC) [Entered: 06/05/2019 01:31 PM]
Main Doc
505032985
Jul 14, 2019
SUFFICIENT APPELLANT’S BRIEF FILED # of Copies Provided: 0 Sufficient Brief deadline satisfied. Paper Copies of Brief due on 07/30/2019 for Appellants Joanna Burke and John Burke. [19-20267]REVIEWED AND/OR EDITED – The original text prior to review appeared as follows: APPELLANT’S BRIEF FILED Instructions to Attorney: PLEASE READ THE ATTACHED NOTICE FOR INSTRUCTIONS ON HOW TO REMEDY THE DEFAULT. # of Copies Provided: 0 A/Pet’s Brief deadline satisfied. Sufficient Brief due on 07/29/2019 for Appellants Joanna Burke and John Burke.. Record Excerpts due on 07/29/2019 for Appellants Joanna Burke and John Burke. Appellee’s Brief due on 08/13/2019 for Appellee Ocwen Loan Servicing, L.L.C. [19-20267] REVIEWED AND/OR EDITED – The original text prior to review appeared as follows: APPELLANT’S BRIEF FILED by Mr. John Burke. Date of service: 07/14/2019 via US mail – Appellant Burke; email – Appellant Burke; Attorney for Appellees: Hopkins, Hopkins [19-20267] (John Burke ) [Entered: 07/14/2019 02:50 PM]
Main Doc
505032988
Jul 14, 2019
APPEARANCE FORM received from Mr. John Burke for the court’s review. Lead Counsel? Yes. [19-20267] (John Burke ) [Entered: 07/14/2019 02:57 PM]
Main Doc
505033390
Jul 15, 2019
Party Mr. John Burke is advised that pro se parties do not file appearance forms. [19-20267] (LBM) [Entered: 07/15/2019 09:46 AM]
Main Doc
505037465
Jul 17, 2019
PROPOSED SUFFICIENT BRIEF filed by Appellant Mr. John Burke in 19-20267 [9096817-2] Brief has been deemed insufficient. Corrections required: Caption to be corrected, table of authorities to be added to the table of content, identify the standard of review, incorrect ROA nimber on page 28. Instructions to Attorney: PLEASE READ THE ATTACHED NOTICE FOR INSTRUCTIONS ON HOW TO REMEDY THE DEFAULT. Sufficient Brief deadline satisfied. Sufficient Brief deadline updated to 08/02/2019 for Appellants Joanna Burke and John Burke [19-20267]REVIEWED AND/OR EDITED – The original text prior to review appeared as follows: PROPOSED SUFFICIENT BRIEF filed by Appellant Mr. John Burke [9096817-2] Date of service: 07/17/2019 via US mail – Appellant Burke; email – Appellant Burke; Attorney for Appellees: Hopkins, Hopkins [19-20267] (John Burke ) [Entered: 07/17/2019 10:21 AM]
Main Doc
505037479
Jul 17, 2019
SUFFICIENT RECORD EXCERPTS FILED. # of Copies Provided: 0 Sufficient Record Excerpts deadline satisfied. Paper Copies of Record Excerpts due on 07/30/2019 for Appellants Joanna Burke and John Burke. [19-20267]REVIEWED AND/OR EDITED – The original text prior to review appeared as follows: RECORD EXCERPTS FILED. Record Excerpts NOT Sufficient as they require caption to be corrected, all documents in the table of content to have ROA numbers. Instructions to Attorney: PLEASE READ THE ATTACHED NOTICE FOR INSTRUCTIONS ON HOW TO REMEDY THE DEFAULT. # of Copies Provided: 0 Record Excerpts deadline satisfied. Sufficient Record Excerpts due on 08/02/2019 for Appellants Joanna Burke and John Burke [19-20267] REVIEWED AND/OR EDITED – The original text prior to review appeared as follows: RECORD EXCERPTS FILED by Appellant Mr. John Burke. Date of service: 07/17/2019 via US mail – Appellant Burke; email – Appellant Burke; Attorney for Appellees: Hopkins, Hopkins [19-20267] (John Burke ) [Entered: 07/17/2019 10:23 AM]
Main Doc
505046382
Jul 23, 2019
PROPOSED SUFFICIENT BRIEF filed by Appellant Mr. John Burke [9096817-2] Date of service: 07/23/2019 via US mail – Appellant Burke; email – Appellant Burke; Attorney for Appellees: Hopkins, Hopkins [19-20267] (John Burke ) [Entered: 07/23/2019 04:49 PM]
Main Doc
505046389
Jul 23, 2019
PROPOSED SUFFICIENT RECORD EXCERPTS filed by Appellant Mr. John Burke [9099430-2] Date of service: 07/23/2019 via US mail – Appellant Burke; email – Appellant Burke; Attorney for Appellees: Hopkins, Hopkins [19-20267] (John Burke ) [Entered: 07/23/2019 04:51 PM]
Main Doc
505050103
Jul 25, 2019
LEVEL 1 EXTENSION REQUESTED by Appellee Ocwen Loan Servicing, L.L.C. for filing Brief of Appellee until 08/28/2019 [19-20267] (Shelley Luan Hopkins ) [Entered: 07/25/2019 03:49 PM]
Main Doc
505050116
Jul 25, 2019
DOCUMENT RECEIVED – NO ACTION TAKEN. No action will be taken at this time on the Supplemental Appendix received from Appellants Ms. Joanna Burke and Mr. John Burke because Must file a motion to supplement the record on appeal with these documents. Filed incorrectly on our docket. [19-20267] (DMS) [Entered: 07/25/2019 03:52 PM]
Main Doc
505050361
Jul 26, 2019
MOTION filed by Appellant Mr. John Burke to supplement the record on appeal with With evidence of the emails between the Court Reporter, SDTX Staff and Joanna Burke as identified on pages 57 of the Burkes Brief [9106497-2]. Date of service: 07/26/2019 via US mail – Appellant Burke; email – Appellant Burke; Attorney for Appellees: Hopkins, Hopkins [19-20267] (John Burke ) [Entered: 07/26/2019 01:31 AM]
Main Doc
Jul 26, 2019
EXTENSION RECEIVED for Appellee Ocwen Loan Servicing, L.L.C.. Extension Denied Reason: Motion Required. Must filed using the motion filed event not the ecf ext rqst event. [19-20267] (DMS) [Entered: 07/26/2019 07:55 AM]
505050627
Jul 26, 2019
OPPOSED MOTION filed by Appellee Ocwen Loan Servicing, L.L.C. to extend time to file brief of appellee until 08/28/2019 [9106661-2]. Date of service: 07/26/2019 via email – Appellants Burke, Burke; Attorney for Appellees: Hopkins, Hopkins; US mail – Appellants Burke, Burke [19-20267] (Shelley Luan Hopkins ) [Entered: 07/26/2019 09:35 AM]
Main Doc
505050791
Jul 26, 2019
CLERK ORDER granting appellee’s opposed motion to extend time to file appellee’s brief filed by Appellee Ocwen Loan Servicing, L.L.C. [9106661-2] Appellee’s Brief due on 08/28/2019 for Appellee Ocwen Loan Servicing, L.L.C. [19-20267] (DMS) [Entered: 07/26/2019 10:34 AM]
Main Doc
505052336
Jul 29, 2019
CLERK ORDER denying appellant’s Motion to supplement the record on appeal filed by Appellant Mr. John Burke [9106497-2] [19-20267] (DMS) [Entered: 07/29/2019 08:33 AM]
Main Doc
Jul 29, 2019
Paper copies of Appellant Brief filed by Appellant Mr. John Burke in 19-20267 received. Paper copies match electronic version of document? Yes # of Copies Provided: 7. Paper Copies of Brief due deadline satisfied. [19-20267] (CMB) [Entered: 08/01/2019 12:27 PM]
Jul 29, 2019
Paper copies of Record Excerpts filed by Appellant Mr. John Burke in 19-20267 received. Paper copies match electronic version of document? Yes # of Copies Provided: 4. Paper Copies of Record Excerpts due deadline satisfied. [19-20267] (CMB) [Entered: 08/01/2019 12:37 PM]
505095608
Aug 28, 2019
APPELLEE’S BRIEF FILED # of Copies Provided: 0 E/Res’s Brief deadline satisfied. Reply Brief due on 09/18/2019 for Appellants Joanna Burke and John Burke. Paper Copies of Brief due on 09/03/2019 for Appellee Ocwen Loan Servicing, L.L.C.. [19-20267]REVIEWED AND/OR EDITED – The original text prior to review appeared as follows: APPELLEE’S BRIEF FILED by Ocwen Loan Servicing, L.L.C.. Date of service: 08/28/2019 via email – Appellants Burke, Burke; Attorney for Appellees: Hopkins, Hopkins; US mail – Appellant Burke [19-20267] (Mark D. Hopkins ) [Entered: 08/28/2019 12:52 PM]
Main Doc
505096644
Aug 29, 2019
DOCUMENT RECEIVED – NO ACTION TAKEN. No action will be taken at this time on the Extension Request received from Appellants Ms. Joanna Burke and Mr. John Burke because this document must be filed as a motion using the motion filed event and not the attorney extension request event [19-20267] (DMS) [Entered: 08/29/2019 07:56 AM]
Main Doc
505096674
Aug 29, 2019
OPPOSED MOTION filed by Appellant Mr. John Burke to extend time to file reply brief until 10/02/2019 [9132646-2]. Date of service: 08/29/2019 via US mail – Appellant Burke; email – Appellant Burke; Attorney for Appellees: Hopkins, Hopkins [19-20267] (John Burke ) [Entered: 08/29/2019 08:12 AM]
Main Doc
505097442
Aug 29, 2019
CLERK ORDER granting in part appllants’ opposed Motion to extend time to file reply brief filed by Appellant Mr. John Burke [9132646-2] Reply Brief deadline updated to 09/25/2019 for Appellants Joanna Burke and John Burke [19-20267] (DMS) [Entered: 08/29/2019 12:37 PM]
Main Doc
Aug 30, 2019
Paper copies of Appellee Brief filed by Appellee Ocwen Loan Servicing, L.L.C. in 19-20267 received. Paper copies match electronic version of document? Yes # of Copies Provided: 7. Paper Copies of Brief due deadline satisfied. [19-20267] (MRW) [Entered: 08/30/2019 02:11 PM]
505121816
Sep 18, 2019
FED. R. APP. P. 44 Notice of Challenge to Constitutionality of Statute filed by Appellants Ms. Joanna Burke and Mr. John Burke. [19-20267]REVIEWED AND/OR EDITED – The original text prior to review appeared as follows: FED. R. APP. P. 44 Notice of Challenge to Constitutionality of Statute filed by Appellant Mr. John Burke. Date of Service: 09/18/2019 via US mail – Appellant Burke; email – Appellant Burke; Attorney for Appellees: Hopkins, Hopkins [19-20267] (John Burke ) [Entered: 09/18/2019 04:13 AM]
Main Doc
505123931
Sep 19, 2019
OPPOSED MOTION to stay further proceedings in this court for 90 days . Reason: awaiting a final rule or adjudication on the constitional challenges, to suspend briefing notice dated 06/05/2019 [9148078-3]. Date of service: 09/19/2019 Response/Opposition due on 09/30/2019. [19-20267]REVIEWED AND/OR EDITED – The original text prior to review appeared as follows: OPPOSED MOTION filed by Appellant Mr. John Burke to stay further proceedings in this court. Reason: Constitutional Challenge(s), to extend time to file reply brief until 03/18/2020 [9148078-3]. Date of service: 09/19/2019 via US mail – Appellant Burke; email – Appellant Burke; Attorney for Appellees: Hopkins, Hopkins [19-20267] (John Burke ) [Entered: 09/19/2019 06:46 AM]
Main Doc
505135143
Sep 25, 2019
DOCUMENT RECEIVED – NO ACTION TAKEN. No action will be taken at this time on the Reply Brief received from Appellants Ms. Joanna Burke and Mr. John Burke because FIled incorrectly on the docket as a Rule 28(i) letter. [19-20267] (DMS) [Entered: 09/27/2019 09:43 AM]
Main Doc
505136566
Sep 27, 2019
APPELLANT’S REPLY BRIEF FILED # of Copies Provided: 0 Reply Brief deadline satisfied. Paper Copies of Brief due on 10/07/2019 for Appellants Joanna Burke and John Burke. [19-20267]REVIEWED AND/OR EDITED – The original text prior to review appeared as follows: APPELLANT’S REPLY BRIEF FILED by Mr. John Burke. Date of service: 09/27/2019 via US mail – Appellant Burke; email – Appellant Burke; Attorney for Appellees: Hopkins, Hopkins [19-20267] (John Burke ) [Entered: 09/27/2019 10:57 PM]
Main Doc
505148016
Oct 7, 2019
Paper copies of Appellant Reply Brief filed by Appellant Mr. John Burke in 19-20267 received. Paper copies match electronic version of document? Yes They require: durable gray covers # of Copies Provided: 7. Paper Copies of Brief due deadline satisfied.. Sufficient Paper Copies of Brief due on 10/15/2019 for Appellants Joanna Burke and John Burke [19-20267] (MRW) [Entered: 10/07/2019 01:31 PM]
Main Doc
Oct 11, 2019
Paper copies of Reply Brief [9161773-2] received as sufficient. Sufficient Paper Copies of Brief due deadline satisfied. [19-20267] (DMS) [Entered: 10/18/2019 11:10 AM]
505165318
Oct 19, 2019
OPPOSED MOTION filed by Appellant Mr. John Burke to stay further proceedings in this court. Reason: US Supreme Court Selia Law Case #19-7 re CFPB Constitutionality Question and Dodd-Frank Act Question. Date of service: 10/19/2019 via US mail – Appellant Burke; email – Appellant Burke; Attorney for Appellees: Hopkins, Hopkins [19-20267] (John Burke ) [Entered: 10/19/2019 08:57 PM]
Main Doc
505174399
Oct 25, 2019
RESPONSE/OPPOSITION filed by Ocwen Loan Servicing, L.L.C. [9176007-1] to the Motion to stay further proceedings in this court filed by Appellant Mr. John Burke [9170890-2], Motion to stay further proceedings in this court filed by Appellant Mr. John Burke [9148078-2], Motion to suspend briefing notice filed by Appellant Mr. John Burke [9148078-3], Letter filed by Appellants Mr. John Burke, Ms. Joanna Burke and Mr. John Burke [9146872-2] Date of Service: 10/25/2019 via email – Appellants Burke, Burke; Attorney for Appellees: Hopkins, Hopkins; US mail – Appellant Burke. [19-20267] (Mark D. Hopkins ) [Entered: 10/25/2019 01:12 PM]
Main Doc
505175217
Oct 27, 2019
OPPOSED MOTION filed by Appellant Mr. John Burke for leave to file a supplement to Response/Opposition [9176007-2], Letter [9146872-2] [9176432-2], to supplement the record on appeal with two exhibits as uploaded here [9176432-3] and INCORPORATED RESPONSE to the Motion to supplement the record on appeal filed by Appellant Mr. John Burke [9106497-2] Date of service: 10/27/2019 via US mail – Appellant Burke; email – Appellant Burke; Attorney for Appellees: Hopkins, Hopkins [19-20267] (John Burke ) [Entered: 10/27/2019 07:19 PM]
Main Doc
505175990
Oct 28, 2019
REPLY filed by Appellants Ms. Joanna Burke and Mr. John Burke [9176855-1] to the Response/Opposition filed by Appellee Ocwen Loan Servicing, L.L.C. in 19-20267 [9176007-2]. Date of Service: 10/27/2019. [19-20267] (INCORPORATED IN MOTION TO SUPPLEMENT THE RECORD) (DMS) [Entered: 10/28/2019 11:24 AM]
Main Doc
505176179
Oct 28, 2019
COURT ORDER denying Motion to stay further proceedings in this court filed by Appellant Mr. John Burke [9148078-2]; denying Motion to suspend briefing notice filed by Appellant Mr. John Burke [9148078-3] [19-20267] (AS) [Entered: 10/28/2019 12:29 PM]
Main Doc
505176454
Oct 28, 2019
CLERK ORDER denying appellant’s opposed Motion to supplement the record on appeal filed by Appellant Mr. John Burke [9176432-3] [19-20267] (DMS) [Entered: 10/28/2019 02:01 PM]
Main Doc
| General Docket United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit |
|
||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||
|
Bandit Lawyer Hagger Abandons Client as Judge Hanen Issues Particularly Unpersuasive Opinion
While the Court finds no binding precedent on point, it finds multiple decisions from within the Fifth Circuit to be particularly persuasive.
A Hard-Money Construction Loan Fee Dispute Leads Leaveil Skinner Facing Foreclosure by BDF Hopkins
4231 Fernwood Drive Houston, TX 77021 is facing foreclosure by BDF Hopkins in Harris County District Court. They’ve not snap removed the case.
Gilbert Flores Switches From Bandit Lawyer Robert Robbin’ Newark to Bandit Lawyer Erick DeLaRogue
Homeowner Gilbert Flores case has just ended with Federal Judge Andrew Hanen dismissal with prejudice, but Delarue will take the case.
