Grochocinski v. Mayer Brown Rowe & Maw LLP et al

Filing 192

COPY of order dated 5/13/2010 from the USCA for the Seventh Circuit regarding notice of appeal 175 ; Appellate case no. : 10-2057. Upon consideration of the Appellant's Motion to stay appeal, filed on May 10, 2010, by counsel for the appellant,IT IS ORDERED that the motion is GRANTED. Proceedings in this appeal shall be held in abeyance pending resolution by the district court of the pending motion to intervene. Appellant is ORDERED to file a status report with this court by July 9, 2010 or within 10 days of the district courts resolution of the motion to intervene. (hp, )

Download PDF
Case: 10-2057 Document: 5 Filed: 05/13/2010 Pages: 1 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SEVENTH CIRCUIT Everett M cKinley D irksen U nited States C ourthouse O ffice of the C lerk R oom 2722 - 219 S. D earborn Street Ph on e: (312) 435-5850 C hicago, Illinois 60604 w w w .ca7.u scou rts.gov ORDER May 13, 2010 BEFORE DIANE S. SYKES, Circuit Judge DAVID E. GROCHOCINSKI, not individually, but solely in his capacity as the Chapter 7 Trustee for the bankruptcy estate of CM GT, INC., Plaintiff - Appellant No.: 10-2057 v. M AYER BROW N ROW E & M AW , LLP and RONALD B. GIVEN, Defendants - Appellees Originating Case Information: District Court No: 1:06-cv-05486 Northern District of Illinois, Eastern Division District Judge Virginia M. Kendall Upon consideration of the APPELLANT’S MOTION TO STAY APPEAL, filed on May 10, 2010, by counsel for the appellant, IT IS ORDERED that the motion is GRANTED. Proceedings in this appeal shall be held in abeyance pending resolution by the district court of the pending motion to intervene. Appellant is ORDERED to file a status report with this court by July 9, 2010 or within 10 days of the district court’s resolution of the motion to intervene. form name: c7_Order_3J (form ID: 177)

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.


Why Is My Information Online?