Matches in SCALES for { <scales/DocketEntry/ilcd;;3:16-cv-03224_de75> ?p ?o ?g. }
Showing items 1 to 5 of
5
with 100 items per page.
- ilcd;;3:16-cv-03224_de75 RegisterActionDate "2017-08-08" @default.
- ilcd;;3:16-cv-03224_de75 RegisterActionDescriptionText "Text Order: Plaintiff's motion for leave to appeal in forma pauperis regarding the Court's denial of Plaintiff's motion for counsel is denied. (d/e 65 .) The Court's denial of Plaintiff's motion for appointed counsel is not a ruling appropriate for interlocutory review. See Randle v. Victor Welding Supply Co., 664 F.2d 1064 (7th Cir. 1981) (district court's denial of motion to appoint counsel is reviewable on final judgment, not interlocutory appeal). An interlocutory appeal may be allowed by the Court of Appeals if this Court finds that there is "a controlling question of law as to which there is substantial ground for difference of opinion and that an immediate appeal... may materially advance the ultimate termination of the litigation...." 28 U.S.C. § 1292(b). This Court sees no debatable question of law nor would an immediate appeal materially advance this case. Plaintiff may appeal all the adverse orders once final judgment is entered for all the claims. Entered by Judge Sue E. Myerscough on 08/08/2017. (SKN, ilcd) (Entered: 08/08/2017)" @default.
- ilcd;;3:16-cv-03224_de75 AdministrativeID "66" @default.
- ilcd;;3:16-cv-03224_de75 hasJudgeReference SJ001511 @default.
- ilcd;;3:16-cv-03224_de75 hasReferenceToOtherEntry ilcd;;3:16-cv-03224_de73 @default.