| Date▲▼ | Event Type▲▼ | Disposition▲▼ | Remarks | Document |
| 12/28/2018 | Motion to Abate disposed | Denied |
Second Motion to Abate denied.
|
|
| 12/26/2018 | Motion to Abate filed | |
Second Motion to Abate filed on behalf of Zsolt Petko, et al.
|
|
| 12/23/2019 | Document received (See Remarks) | |
Document received on behalf of the Office of the Clerk of the Supreme Court of the United States.
|
|
| 12/18/2018 | Notice requesting filing fee | |
Fee request sent to petitioners.
|
|
| 12/18/2018 | Petition Reinstated | |
|
|
| 12/18/2018 | Abatement Order Lifted | |
Abatement Order issued on October 22, 2018 is lifted. Case is reinstated.
|
|
| 11/20/2019 | Document received (See Remarks) | |
|
|
| 11/06/2019 | Document received (See Remarks) | |
Motion for Rehearing in the Supreme Court of the United States received from Zsolt Petko, et al.
|
|
| 10/22/2018 | Petition for Review disposed | Matter in Supreme Court of Texas Abated |
|
|
| 10/22/2018 | Order of the Court Issued | Matter in Supreme Court of Texas Abated |
This case is removed from the Court's active docket. It is the parties’ responsibility to immediately notify this Court once the court of appeals’ decision is final.
|
|
| 10/22/2018 | Motion to Abate disposed | Filing granted |
Motion to Abate granted.
|
|
| 10/19/2018 | Motion to Abate filed | |
Motion to Abate filed on behalf of Zsolt Petko, et al.
|
|
| 10/18/2018 | Phone call from Clerk's Office | |
Call made to petitioner Zsolt Petko regarding filing.
|
|
| 10/11/2019 | Letter Filed | |
Letter filed on behalf the United States of America.
|
|
| 10/09/2018 | Notice requesting filing fee | |
Fee request sent to petitioners.
|
|
| 10/09/2018 | Second Motion for Extension of Time to File Petition for Review disposed | Filing dismissed as moot |
Second Motion for Extension of Time to file Petition for Review dismissed as moot.
|
|
| 10/09/2018 | Electronic communication sent to Party | |
Email sent to respondent's counsel inquiring whether the motion for extension is opposed.
|
|
| 10/08/2018 | Petition for Review | |
Petition for Review filed on behalf of Zsolt Petko, et al.
|
|
| 10/08/2018 | Second Motion for Extension of Time to File Petition for Review filed | |
Second Motion for Extension of Time to file Petition for Review filed on behalf of Zsolt Petko and Zsuzsanna Adam.
|
|
| 09/24/2018 | Motion for Extension of Time to File Petition for Review disposed | Filing granted |
Motion for Extension of Time to file Petition for Review granted. Petition for Review is due October 8, 2018.
|
|
| 09/20/2018 | Call received | |
Petitioner will be refiling the motion for extension of time to file petition for review in order to pay the $10.00 filing fee.
|
|
| 09/11/2018 | Notice requesting filing fee | |
|
|
| 09/07/2018 | Motion for Extension of Time to File Petition for Review filed | |
Motion for Extension of Time to file Petition for Review filed on behalf of Zsolt Petko and Zsuzsanna Adam.
|
|
| 07/08/2019 | Notice received | |
Notice received from Supreme Court of the United States, Office of the Clerk.
|
|
| 03/08/2019 | Miscellaneous motion disposed. See Remarks. | Denied |
Motion to Reopen Case denied
|
|
| 03/06/2019 | Call received | |
In person, Mr. Petko requested all documents the Court had regarding his case. Informed Mr. Petko that all publicly available documents are available on the docket at the Court's website.
|
|
| 03/04/2019 | Miscellaneous Motion | |
Motion to Reopen Case filed on behalf of Zsolt Petko, et al.
|
|
| 03/04/2019 | Call received | |
30 minute call regarding disposition of the case. Petitioners state they were not sent notices via mail on dispositions. Verified address again and explained that notices were sent out. Also explained to petitioners that the filing fee for the petition for review was due at the time of filing.
|
|
| 03/04/2019 | Phone call from Clerk's Office | |
Returned call to petitioners. Hour long call regarding disposition of the case. Petitioner wanted to know why the abatement order was lifted and the petition was reinstated on December 18, 2018. Clerk's Office reviewed the Court of Appeals website regarding disposition of case and thus, lifted the abatement order and sent a fee request. Fee request was not paid so case was dismissed for lack of filing fee. Petitioners stated they did not receive notice of fee requests or of other dispositions except the granting of the motion to abate. Verified that mailing address was correct. Explained to petitioners they can submit something in writing for the Court to consider.
|
|
| 03/04/2019 | Information from Supreme Court sent to party/parties | |
Letter sent to petitioner from the Court.
|
|
| 03/03/2019 | Document filed (see remarks) | |
Document filed. Request for Finding of Facts filed on behalf of Zsolt Petko, et al.
|
|
| 03/01/2019 | Notice sent to Court of Appeals | |
|
|
| 02/05/2019 | Response to Motion filed | |
Response to Motion for Clarification filed on behalf of Zsolt Petko.
|
|
| 02/04/2019 | Document filed (see remarks) | |
Motion for Time Limit filed on behalf of Zsolt Petko, et al
|
|
| 01/31/2019 | Miscellaneous motion disposed. See Remarks. | Denied |
Motion for Explanation denied.
|
|
| 01/29/2019 | Miscellaneous Motion | |
Motion for Explanation filed on behalf of Zsolt Petko, et al.
|
|
| 01/26/2019 | Document filed (see remarks) | |
Bill of Exception filed on behalf of Zsolt Petko, et al.
|
|
| 01/22/2020 | Call received | |
Petitioner asked the Clerk of the Court to give him an opinion about whether the Clerk has a duty to inform the Judicial Conduct Commission if a judge sitting on a case is involved in wrongdoing or has Alzheimer's which impacts the judge's decision. The Clerk told petitioner that he cannot give him legal advice and that he is not aware of a procedure that would assist him in challenging any action taken by Justice Higley now that the Court has dismissed his case and an appeal has been filed with the US Supreme Court. The Clerk suggested that petitioner consult with an attorney.
|
|
| 01/22/2020 | Call received | |
Call received from petitioner regarding lower court decision and what, if anything, can be done regarding the dismissal of former Justice Higley. Transferred call to Clerk.
|
|
| 01/18/2019 | Petition for Review disposed | Filing is dismissed because no filing fee was paid |
See TEX. R. APP. P. 5
|
|