Seamster v. Chael et al

Filing 2

OPINION AND ORDER: Appellant Deborah Seamsters Notice of Appeal from the United States Bankruptcy Court is DISMISSED because she has failed to pay the required filing fee despite several warnings to do so, because the order to which the notice was d irected was not a final appealable order, because the order was later vacated rendering the appeal moot, and because Seamster hasnot timely filed the required brief in support of her appeal re 1 Bankruptcy Appeal. Signed by Chief Judge Philip P Simon on 10/14/2014. (cc: Seamster, USBC)(rmn)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA
HAMMOND DIVISION
DEBORAH R. SEAMSTER,

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Appellant,
v.
PAUL R. CHAEL and
JAMES SADLOWSKI,
Appellees.

NO. 2:14CV320 PPS
Appeal from Bankruptcy
Petition #14-21849-jpk

OPINION AND ORDER
On May 30, 2014, Deborah Seamster filed a pro se Chapter 13 petition in the United
States Bankruptcy Court seeking debt relief. The Trustee filed a motion to dismiss the case on
June 26. Several days later on July 1, Bankruptcy Judge Klingeberger issued an order
scheduling a hearing on the motion to dismiss. [DE 1 at 7.] The next day, Seamster filed a
Notice of Appeal directed to the July 1 order (which merely set a hearing and was not itself a
dispositive order). [DE 1 at 9.]
Seamster did not pay the applicable $298.00 filing fee associated with an appeal. On
July 8, Judge Klingeberger issued an order bringing the omission to Seamster’s attention and
warning that the appeal might be dismissed without further notice if the fee was not paid within
seven days. [DE 1 at 10.] As of October 6, the Clerk of the Bankruptcy Court advises that
Seamster has not paid the required filing fee.
Besides Seamster’s failure to pay the filing fee, the appeal has other problems as well.
The July 1 order setting a hearing is not a final, appealable order, because it grants no ultimate
relief to any party. Furthermore, both the Trustee’s motion to dismiss and the hearing were
shortly thereafter undone – on July 10, the Trustee withdrew that motion to dismiss and the

bankruptcy court cancelled the hearing. [DE 1 at 12, 13.] So any appeal associated with either
the motion to dismiss itself or the hearing scheduled concerning the motion were rendered moot.
All of this was explained to Seamster by the bankruptcy judge when she appeared for a
July 25 hearing on her effort to obtain a stay of eviction based on her appeal.1 At that time,
Seamster indicated that her Notice of Appeal was an attempt to appeal the dismissal of a prior
Chapter 13 case. Judge Klingeberger’s July 31 order describes the procedural scenario and his
attempt to explain to Seamster that she could not appeal the dismissal of one case by a filing in a
different case, and that the time for appeal of the earlier case had long since expired. [DE 1 at
28.]2 Reviewing why an automatic bankruptcy stay of eviction proceedings was not available to
Seamster merely based on her Chapter 13 petition, Klingeberger further denied a stay pending
appeal, finding that Seamster “has no possibility whatsoever of success with respect to her
appeal of the July 1, 2014 hearing scheduling order.” [Id. at 29.]
Seamster’s bankruptcy case was later dismissed based on her failure to have complied
with the required credit counseling course and with an installment plan for her filing fee. [DE 1
at 31-32.] But this happened on August 21, 2014, and is not the subject of the Notice of Appeal
Seamster filed on July 2.
Finally, as the appellant, Seamster was required to file her brief in support of her appeal
by September 22. No brief has been filed.
ACCORDINGLY:

1

The avoidance of eviction motive appears to explain much about Seamster’s filings in the
bankruptcy court.
2

The order also again reminds Seamster that the $298 filing fee for the appeal remained
unpaid. [Id. at 27.]
2

Appellant Deborah Seamster’s Notice of Appeal from the United States Bankruptcy
Court is DISMISSED because she has failed to pay the required filing fee despite several
warnings to do so, because the order to which the notice was directed was not a final appealable
order, because the order was later vacated rendering the appeal moot, and because Seamster has
not timely filed the required brief in support of her appeal.
SO ORDERED.
ENTERED: October 14, 2014.
/s/ Philip P. Simon
PHILIP P. SIMON, CHIEF JUDGE
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

3