Auld v. Sun West Mortgage Co., Inc.

Case Type:
Case Status:
16-3069, 3071 (10th Circuit, Jun 28,2017) Not Published
An appeal in a civil case from the District Court is timely under Fed. R. App. P. 4 if filed within 30 days of the order being appealed from and the failure to properly designate the order from which the appeal is taken does not deprive the court of jurisdiction so long as the appellant’s intent is clear. Finally, failure to comply with Fed. R. App. P. 28 does not mandate dismissal but generally forms a basis to affirm the lower court’s decision.
Procedural context:
Four months after debtor’s chapter 11 case and related adversary proceeding were dismissed, debtor filed a motion seeking (1) additional findings of fact and conclusions of law; (2) relief under Fed. R. Civ. P. 60; and (3) an extension of time. The district court denied that motion on March 29, 2016, and debtor filed a notice of appeal six days later, on April 4, 2016. The 10th Circuit affirmed the district court’s denial of debtor’s motion.
The appellee sought dismissal of debtor’s pro se appeal for three reasons: (1) the court lacked jurisdiction because the appeal was untimely, (2) the appeal did not satisfy Fed. R. App. P. 3(c) because debtor didn’t specify the order being appealed from, and (3) debtor failed to present issues for review as required under Fed. R. App. P. 28. Debtor argued that the appellee lacked statutory standing and the bankruptcy court lacked constitutional authority under Stern v. Marshall.
Lucero, O’Brien, Moritz

ABI Membership is required to access the full summary. Please Sign In using your ABI Member credentials. Not a Member yet? Join ABI now - it is absolutely worth it!

About us in numbers

3335 in the system

3214 Summarized

1 Being Processed