Cathy Mestman v. Runaway Beach Condominium Asso, et al
Original Case: 3:21-cv-16529
| Third Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals | |
| Case #: | 0:21-cv-02752 |
| Type | civil / private / civil rights |
| Nature of Suit | 440 Civil Rights - Other Civil Rights |
| Case Filed: | Sep 20, 2021 |
| Terminated: | Oct 15, 2021 |
| Last checked: Monday Oct 18, 2021 4:29 AM EDT |
|
Defendant - Appellee
RUNAWAY BEACH CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION
|
|
|
Defendant - Appellee
JUDGE QUINN
|
|
|
Defendant - Appellee
TIFFANY BYCZKOWSKI
|
|
|
Plaintiff - Appellant
CATHY MESTMAN
|
Represented By
|
GPO
Oct 15 2021
NOT PRECEDENTIAL PER CURIAM OPINION Coram: JORDAN, RESTREPO and SCIRICA, Circuit Judges. Total Pages: 6. ALD-005 [21-2686, 21-2752] |
| Docket last updated: 10/18/2021 4:29 AM EDT |
| Monday, September 20, 2021 | ||
| RECORD available on District Court CM/ECF. (SB) | ||
| CIVIL CASE DOCKETED. Notice filed by Appellant Cathy Mestman in District Court No. 3-21-cv-16529. (SB) | ||
|
Att: 1
3 pgs
Notice of Appeal
|
||
|
Att: 2
5 pgs
District Court Order
|
||
|
Att: 3
1 pgs
Standing Order
|
||
|
Att: 4
1 pgs
Case Caption
|
||
|
Att: 5
2 pgs
Case Opening Letter
|
||
|
2
pgs
ORDER (Clerk) The above captioned appeals are consolidated for all purposes. By order entered September 14, 2021, Appellant’s motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis in appeal No. 21-2686 was granted. The grant of in forma pauperis status shall also apply to the appeal at No. 21-2752 All documents filed in No. 21-2688 and all documents received to date shall also be applied to the appeal at No. 21-2752 All future filings will be filed in both cases unless the filing specifies that it is applicable to only one of the cases. The appeal at No. 21-2752 shall be submitted to the Court for possible dismissal and summary action. It appears that the Court may lack jurisdiction as the order may not be reviewable at this time by a court of appeals. Under 28 U.S.C. Section 1291, only final orders of the district courts may be appealed. Ordinarily, an order that dismisses a complaint or denies an in forma pauperis motion without prejudice is neither final nor appealable when the deficiency may be corrected. See Borelli v. City of Reading, 532 F. 2d 950 (3d Cir. 1976)(per curiam) (to be final, order of dismissal must be with prejudice; order dismissing without prejudice contemplates leave to amend and is not appealable unless plaintiff elects to stand on complaint). The order that you have appealed decides fewer than all of the claims, or determines the rights and liabilities of fewer than all of the parties. The Court will determine if it has jurisdiction to consider the appeal. Should the Court determine that jurisdiction does exist, the Court may take summary action. It is noted that the appeal at No. 21-2688 has also been listed for possible dismissal. Appellant has previously submitted documents as to why the Court should proceed with the appeal. The Court will consider the prior filings with respect to both appeals. Should the appellant which to file any supplemental argument with respect to this Court’s jurisdiction or whether summary action is appropriate she may do so within 7 days from the date of this order. On September 18, 2021, appellant forwarded thirteen separate emails some with attachments. The emails and attachments will be entered on the Court’s dockets as a Motion to Expand and Record and in Support of Appeal. As some of the exhibits contain personal information, access to the documents will be restricted to the parties, the Court, and Court personnel. 21-2686 21-2752 (SB)
|
||
|
MOTION with exhibits filed by Appellant Cathy Mestman in 21-2686 in Support of the Appeal and to Expand the District Court Record. Certificate of Service dated 09/20/2021. Certificate of Service dated 09/20/2021. Service made by US mail. 21-2686 21-2752 --[Edited 09/23/2021 by SB] (SB)
|
||