Stansbury v. Holloway (In re Holloway)
- Summarized by Gregory Hesse , Hunton Andrews Kurth LLP
- 12 years 3 weeks ago
- No. 10-30576; 2011 WL 1839452 (5th Cir. May 13, 2011)
- The sixty-day deadline under 28 U.S.C. Sec. 158(d)(2)(E) for certification requests to appeal from an interlocutory order is jurisdictional. Thus, failure to comply by with the deadline requires the dismissal of an appeal due to the lack of jurisdiction.
Further, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals held that it may not use equitable powers to relieve the parties from the statutory requirements for proper certification of an interlocutory appeal under 28 U.S.C. Sec. 158(d)(2)(E)
- Procedural context:
- This was an appeal from an interlocutory order of the Bankruptcy Court holding that the parties did not have a meeting of the minds sufficient to create an enforceable settlement or compromise.
- The litigation arose out of a loan from Stansbury to a corporation in which both Stansbury and Holloway were shareholders. In exchange for the loan, Stansbury received a promissory note executed by both the corporation and Holloway. Holloway filed for bankruptcy under chapter 7. In the bankruptcy case, Stansbury objected to the dischargeability of the debt. Subsequently, Stansbury and Holloway entered into settlement negotiations that Stansbury claimed resulted in an enforceable settlement agreement. When Holloway did not perform, Stansbury filed a motion to enforce the settlement agreement. Holloway objeted to the motion and disputed that the the parties had agreed on all the material terms. On November 18, 2008, the Bankruptcy Court denied the motion and held that the parties did not have a meeting of the minds sufficient to create an enforceable settlement.
Stansbury filed an interlocutory appeal of the Bankruptcy Court's order ito the District Court (the "First Appeal"). The District Court affirmed. The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals dismissed the First Appeal, holding that it was an interlocutory appeal that the court did not have jurisdiction to consider.
After the First Appeal was dismissed in 2010, the parties went to the Bankruptcy Court seeking certification to appeal the Bankruptcy Court's order. The Bankruptcy Court granted the motion, and the parties requested the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals' permission to appeal (the "Second Appeal").
The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals dismissed the Second Appeal for want of jurisdiction because the parties did not seek certification to appeal the Bankruptcy Court's order within 60 days of it being entered as required under 28 U.S.C. Sec. 158(d)(2)(E).
- Garza, Stewart and Haynes
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!