Weilert v. Salven

Filing 8

MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING Appellee's 5 Motion to Dismiss Bankruptcy Appeal, signed by Chief Judge Lawrence J. O'Neill on 05/02/18. CASE CLOSED (Martin-Gill, S)

Download PDF
1 2 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 3 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 4 5 6 In re: MICHAEL WEILERT and GENEVIEVE M. DE MONTREMARE, 9 In re: M&G WEILERT FAMILY, L.P. MICHAEL WEILERT and GENEVIEVE M. DE MONTREMARE, 10 Appellants, v. 11 12 MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER RE: APPELLEE’S MOTION TO DISMISS BANKRUPTCY APPEAL Debtors. 7 8 1:17-cv-00984-LJO JAMES E. SALVEN, CHAPTER 7 TRUSTEE, 13 Appellee. 14 15 I. INTRODUCTION 16 This matter concerns Michael Weilert’s and Genevieve M. De Montremare’s (collectively 17 “Appellants”) appeal pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §158(a) from the July 6, 2017, order of the United States 18 Bankruptcy Court for the Eastern District of California. James Salven, Chapter 7 Trustee (“Appellee”), 19 filed the instant motion to dismiss. For the following reasons, Appellee’s motion to dismiss is 20 GRANTED. 21 22 II. BACKGROUND This case originated in the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Eastern District of California 23 (the “Bankruptcy Court”), where it was assigned the case number 13-16155-B-7. ECF No. 1 at 1. On 24 July 6, 2017, Bankruptcy Judge René Lastreto II issued an order finding Appellants in contempt of court 25 for failing to comply with an April 4, 2015, order. Id. at 6. Appellants were ordered to turn over 1 1 $9,642.05 to Appellee within 14 calendar days. Id. Appellant Michael Weilert signed and filed a notice 2 of appeal of the July 6 contempt order on July 21, 2017. Id. at 7-8. The appeal was transmitted to this 3 Court on July 24, 2017. Id. at 1. On September 29, 2017, the Bankruptcy Court certified that no 4 designated record, statement of issues, reporter’s transcript, or notice regarding the transcript had been 5 filed. ECF No. 4. 6 On March 23, 2018, Appellee filed the instant motion to dismiss, arguing that Appellants’ notice 7 of appeal was untimely filed and the Court lacks jurisdiction to hear the appeal, and also that the appeal 8 should be dismissed because Appellants have not designated the record on appeal or entered an 9 appearance in this matter. ECF No. 5. Appellee also filed an associated request for the Court to take 10 judicial notice of pleadings and filings in the Bankruptcy Court. ECF No. 6. Plaintiff did not file an 11 opposition to the motion to dismiss or the request for judicial notice. On April 17, 2018, in accordance 12 with Local Rule 230(g), the Court took this matter under submission on the papers. ECF No. 7. III. ANALYSIS 13 14 A. Jurisdiction to Hear Appeal 15 The final order or judgment of a bankruptcy court may be appealed to a federal district court 16 pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 158. Federal Rule of Bankruptcy Procedure (“Bankruptcy Rule”) 8002 requires 17 notice of the appeal to be filed within 14 days after the order is entered. The Supreme Court has 18 repeatedly held that “the taking of an appeal within the prescribed time is mandatory and jurisdictional.” 19 Bowles v. Russell, 551 U.S. 205, 209 (2007) (quotation marks omitted). The Supreme Court has also 20 held that time limits which are based solely on the Bankruptcy Rules and not on a statutory 21 pronouncement are non-jurisdictional. See Kontrick v. Ryan, 540 U.S. 443, 453-54 (2004). In the 22 specific context of an appeal from the order of a bankruptcy court, however, while the fourteen day 23 period is specified in the Bankruptcy Rules and not in the statute granting the district courts jurisdiction 24 to hear bankruptcy appeals, the statute explicitly incorporates the timing requirements of the Bankruptcy 25 Rules. 28 U.S.C. § 158(c)(2) (“An appeal under subsections (a) and (b) of this section shall be taken . . . 2 1 in the time provided by Rule 8002 of the Bankruptcy Rules.”). A number of Circuit Courts have 2 concluded that the 14 day deadline for an appeal under § 158 is therefore jurisdictional, In re Sobczak- 3 Slomszewski, 826 F.3d 429, 432 (7th Cir. 2016) (holding that the specific incorporation of Rule 8002 in 4 § 158 constitutes a jurisdictional timeliness requirement); In re Berman-Smith, 737 F.3d 997, 1002 (5th 5 Cir. 2013) (same); in re Caterbone, 640 F.3d 108, 111-12 (3d Cir. 2011); In re Latture, 605 F.3d 830, 6 836 (10th Cir. 2010) (same), and the Ninth Circuit has applied the same standard without comment, In 7 re Ozenne, 841 F.3d 810, 814 (9th Cir. 2016). Accordingly, the 14 day period must be treated as a 8 mandatory and jurisdictional timeliness requirement, and untimely notice of appeal deprives a district 9 court of jurisdiction to hear that appeal and review the bankruptcy court’s order.1 Ramsey v. Ramsey (In 10 re Ramsey), 612 F.2d 1220, 1222 (9th Cir. 1980). Bankruptcy Rule 8002(a)(1) requires that the notice of appeal be filed with the Bankruptcy Court 11 12 “within 14 days after entry of the judgment, order, or decree being appealed.” Bankruptcy Rule 9006 13 sets forth the method for calculating time under those rules. For a time period measured in days, the day 14 of the event triggering the time period, in this case the date on which the order was entered, is excluded. 15 Fed. R. Bankr. P. 9006(a)(1)(A). Every subsequent day is counted, and the last day is included in the 16 time period, unless the last day falls on a Saturday or Sunday, or on a legal holiday, in which case the 17 period continues until the next day that is not a Saturday, Sunday, or legal holiday. Fed. R. Bankr. P. 18 9006(a)(1)(B)-(C). The last day for filing ends at midnight in the court’s time zone when filing 19 electronically, or when the clerk’s office is scheduled to close when filing by other means. Fed. R. 20 Bankr. P. 9006(a)(4). Here, the date on which the order was entered, July 6, 2017, was excluded from the filing period. 21 22 The filing period proceeded to run for the next 14 days and ended at midnight on July 20, 2017. July 20, 23 2017, did not fall on a Saturday, Sunday, or other legal holiday. Appellants filed their notice of appeal 24 25 1 Rule 8002 grants discretion for the bankruptcy court to extend the time to appeal in some circumstances, but only when a motion to extend is filed either before the time to file the notice of appeal has run, or up to 21 days after the time has run if excusable neglect is shown. Fed. R. Bankr. P. 8002(d)(1). Appellants did not file any motion to extend time here. 3 1 2 on July 21, 2017, the day after the period for filing ended. Appellants’ notice of appeal was filed on the day after the period for appeal closed, and was 3 therefore untimely. While this may have been the result of an error in calculating time under the 4 Bankruptcy Rules, the Court has no power to excuse a deviation from a time limit that has been made 5 mandatory and jurisdictional by Congress. Bowles v. Russell, 551 U.S. 205, 214 (2007) (courts lack 6 authority to create equitable exceptions to jurisdictional requirements). The Court simply lacks 7 jurisdiction to hear this appeal. Because the lack of jurisdiction is apparent from the face of the notice of 8 appeal, the Court need not consider Appellee’s remaining arguments or request for judicial notice in 9 deciding this matter. IV. CONCLUSION AND ORDER 10 11 For the foregoing reasons, Appellee’s motion is GRANTED, and this appeal is DISMISSED 12 WITH PREJUDICE. The Clerk of Court is directed to close this case. 13 14 IT IS SO ORDERED. 15 Dated: /s/ Lawrence J. O’Neill _____ May 2, 2018 UNITED STATES CHIEF DISTRICT JUDGE 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 4

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?