STATE OF MINNESOTA

IN COURT OF APPEALS

____________________________________ In the Matter of Delinquent Real Property Taxes for Real Property Described, to wit: O R D E R Lyman Dayton Addition to St. Paul, Lot 5, Blk 46, a/k/a 697 Surrey Avenue, PIN: A09-2031 32.29.22.41.0053, Sharon Lee Anderson a/k/a Sharon Scarrella Anderson, record owner. ____________________________________

BASED ON THE FILE, RECORD, AND PROCEEDINGS, AND BECAUSE:

1. This appeal was filed by mail on November 4, 2009. Appellant, pro se,

seeks review of a judgment entered on September 10, 2009.

2. By notice of case filing dated November 12, 2009, the clerk of the appellate

courts, pursuant to this court’s direction, notified appellant of certain filing deficiencies

and directed that they be remedied within ten days. Appellant did not comply.

3. In an order filed on December 7, 2009, this court directed appellant to

correct the filing deficiencies and to serve and file appellant’s brief on the merits by

December 21. The December 7, 2009 order specifies that appellant’s failure to comply

may result in dismissal of the appeal.

4. Appellant still has not filed a brief or corrected any of the filing deficiencies

identified in the December 7, 2009 order. It appears the appeal has been abandoned.

2

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED: This appeal is dismissed.

Dated: January 6, 2010

BY THE COURT /s/_______________________________ Chief Judge

STATE OF MINNESOTA

IN COURT OF APPEALS

____________________________________ In the Matter of Delinquent Real Property Taxes for Real Property Described, to wit: O R D E R Lyman Dayton Addition to St. Paul, Lot 5, Blk 46, a/k/a 697 Surrey Avenue, A09-2031 PIN: 32.29.22.41.0053, Sharon Lee Anderson a/k/a Sharon Scarrella Anderson, record owner. ____________________________________

BASED ON THE FILE, RECORD, AND PROCEEDINGS, AND BECAUSE:

1. This appeal was filed by mail on November 4, 2009. Appellant, pro se,

seeks review of a judgment entered on September 10, 2009.

2. Appellant filed photocopies of the notice of appeal and statement of the

case, rather than documents containing appellant’s original signature. Appellant did not

file a proper affidavit of service for the appeal papers showing service by United States

mail or personal delivery. See Minn. R. Civ. App. P. 125.03 (stating that service may be

personal or by United States mail). Appellant did not pay the $550 filing fee for the

appeal.

3. By notice of case filing dated November 12, 2009, the clerk of the appellate

courts, pursuant to this court’s direction, notified appellant of the above deficiencies and

directed that they be remedied within ten days.

4. Appellant has not complied with this directive.

2

5. On November 18, appellant notified the office of the clerk of the appellate

courts that an order granting in form apauperis relief was filed with the appeal papers.

6. We note that appellant filed numerous documents with the appeal papers.

Our review of appellant’s filing shows that appellant filed a copy of a March 31, 2009

order granting appellant leave to proceed in forma pauperis in the district court

proceeding. Appellant did not file a copy of a district court order granting appellant leave

to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal. See Minn. R. Civ. App. P. 109.02 (stating that a

motion to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal must be made to the district court).

7. The district court administrator’s register of actions shows that on

September 18, 2009, the district court issued a supplemental in forma pauperis order.

The September 18 order contains a finding that appellant’s claim is not frivolous, and that

appellant is entitled to proceed in forma pauperis. The September 18, 2009 order

authorizes payment of expenses incurred in obtaining a transcript of an August 20, 2009

hearing.

8. As directed below, appellant shall file a copy of the district court’s

September 18, 2009 in forma pauperis order.

9. We will afford appellant a final opportunity to correct the other filing

deficiencies.

10. Appellant’s brief on the merits is due on December 21, 2009, which is 33

days after the transcript was delivered by mail on November 18. See Minn. R. Civ. App.

P. 131.01, subd. 1.

3

11. In the statement of the case, appellant requests oral argument. Because

appellant is without counsel, the case will be submitted on the briefs and record, without

oral argument by any party. See Minn. App. Spec. R. Pract. 2.

12. Appellant filed an uncertified copy of the September 10 judgment from

which the appeal is taken. Because appellant is proceeding in forma pauperis, we will

accept the uncertified copy of the judgment.

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED:

1. The requirement for appellant to file a certified copy of the September 10,

2009 judgment from which the appeal is taken is waived.

2. On or before December 21, 2009, appellant shall file:

(a) A notice of appeal and statement of the case containing appellant’s original signature;

(b) A notarized affidavit showing the date and method of service

of the notice of appeal and statement of the case on respondent’s counsel; (c) A copy of the district court’s September 18, 2009 in forma

pauperis order; and (d) Seven copies of appellant’s brief on the merits, with a

notarized affidavit showing the date and method of service of the brief on respondent’s counsel. One of the brief filed with the clerk of the appellate

courts shall contain appellant’s original signature. 3. Appellant may file an informal brief, in compliance with Minn. R. Civ.

App. P. 128.01, subd. 1.

4. Appellant’s failure to comply with this order may result in the imposition of

sanctions, including dismissal of the appeal.

4

5. Upon completion of briefing, this matter shall be scheduled for nonoral

consideration.

Dated: December 7, 2009

BY THE COURT /s/_______________________________ Chief Judge