M Donald Hayes v John Paul Rieser

Filing 5

ENTRY AND ORDER SUMMARILY AFFIRMING THE RULING OF THE BANKRUPTCY COURT AND TERMINATING CASE. Signed by Judge Thomas M. Rose on 9-10-2018. (de)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO
WESTERN DIVISION AT DAYTON

M. Donald Hayes,
Appellant,
v.

Case No.: 3:17-cv-280
Judge Thomas M. Rose

John Paul Rieser, Trustee, et al.,
Appellees.
______________________________________________________________________________
ENTRY AND ORDER SUMMARILY AFFIRMING THE RULING
OF THE BANKRUPTCY COURT AND TERMINATING CASE
______________________________________________________________________________
On August 18, 2017, Pro Se Appellant M. Donald Hayes appealed a final decision of the
United States Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of Ohio. On September 22, 2017,
Bankruptcy Court Clerk's Certified the Record on Appeal.

When it was noticed that the

certification was returned as undeliverable, the Court re-mailed this notice on July 26, 2018,
ordering Pro Se Appellant to file a brief by August 27, 2018.
Bankruptcy Rule 8018 requires that the appellant must serve and file a brief within 30
days after the docketing of notice that the record has been transmitted or is available
electronically. The Court’s remailing of the Bankruptcy Notice informed Pro Se Appellant that
the briefing date had been extended until August 27, 2018. It has still not been filed.
A party proceeding pro se is entitled to some indulgences. Haines v. Kerner, 404 U.S.
519, 520–21 (1972). But “the lenient treatment generally accorded to pro se litigants has
limits.” Pilgrim v. Littlefield, 92 F.3d 413, 416 (6th Cir. 1996); Greer v. Home Realty Co. of
Memphis Inc., 2010 WL 6512339, at *2 (W.D. Tenn. July 12, 2010) (“Although district courts

may liberally construe the federal and local rules for pro se litigants, even pro se litigants are
obligated to follow these rules”); Looper v. Educ. Credit Mgmt. Corp., 2008 WL 2965887, at *8
(E.D. Tenn. July 30, 2008) (plaintiff's “pro se status does not exempt him from complying with
the rules of procedure”). A pro se party that fails to comply with procedural rules can be
dismissed. Jawara v. Suntrust Bank, No. 3:15-CV-00305, 2016 WL 2770657, at *1–2 (M.D.
Tenn. May 12, 2016), aff'd sub nom. Jawara v. Suntrust Bank (6th Cir. May 23, 2016).
Here, Pro Se Appellant failed to meet the requirements set out in the Federal Rules of
Bankruptcy Procedure. Accordingly, the Court SUMMARILY AFFIRMS the ruling of the
Bankruptcy Court; and DISMISSES this case WITH PREJUDICE. The Clerk of the Court
shall enter Final Judgment in a separate document in accordance with Rule 58 of the Federal
Rules of Civil Procedure. The instant case is TERMINATED from the dockets of the United
States District Court, Southern District of Ohio, Western Division at Dayton.
DONE and ORDERED in Dayton, Ohio, this Monday, September 10, 2018.

s/Thomas M. Rose
_____________________________________
THOMAS M. ROSE
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

-2-