- (5th Circuit, Dec 31,1969)
- Thomas did not brief his claim that the district court erred in referring the IFP motion to the bankruptcy court for the preparation of a report and recommendation and, thus, it is abandoned. Thomas’s complaints about the bankruptcy court’s clerk docketing pleadings several days after they were filed or ruled upon does not raise a nonfrivolous issue on appeal. Thomas had no standing to complain about the lack of notice of the motion to lift the automatic stay because he did not demonstrate that he had an interest in any property involved in the bankruptcy proceeding, and he did not make an appearance in the proceeding prior to the stay being lifted. Because the district court did not err in determining that the appeal was not taken in good faith, the motion to proceed IFP on appeal is denied, and the appeal is dismissed as frivolous. IFP MOTION DENIED; APPEAL DISMISSED.
- Procedural context:
- Frivolous pro se appeal dismissed. Very fact specific and case not to be published.
- Thomas, proceeding pro se, moved to proceed in forma pauperis (IFP) on appeal from the district court’s dismissal of his appeal from the bankruptcy court’s order denying his motion to strike the pleadings filed by a creditor seeking to lift the stay on property that Thomas did not have an interest in and that was no longer property of the estate.
- WIENER, PRADO, and OWEN, Circuit Judges.
3201 in the system
1 Being Processed