Lee Ann Love v. Johnny Wiseman
This text of 698 F. App'x 462 (Lee Ann Love v. Johnny Wiseman) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
MEMORANDUM **
Lee Ann Love appeals pro se from the district court’s order affirming the bankruptcy court’s orders determining Love’s *463 secured status, and dismissing in part Love’s adversary proceeding against the trustee and the debtors. We review de novo our own jurisdiction and whether a bankruptcy court’s decision is final. Silver Sage Partners, Ltd. v. City of Desert Hot Springs (In re City of Desert Hot Springs), 339 F.3d 782, 787 (9th Cir. 2003). We dismiss.
This court lacks jurisdiction because the bankruptcy court’s orders did not dispose of all claims against all defendants in Love’s adversary proceeding. See Walther v. King City Transit Mix, Inc. (In re King City Transit Mix, Inc.), 738 F.2d 1065, 1066-67 (9th Cir. 1984) (bankruptcy court order dismissing one of four counterclaims in adversary proceeding was not final); see also SS Farms, LLC v. Sharp (In re SK Foods, L.P.), 676 F.3d 798, 801-02 (9th Cir. 2012) (district court order affirming interlocutory bankruptcy court order is also interlocutory). Nor did the bankruptcy court direct entry of judgment under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 54(b) and Federal Rule of Bankruptcy Procedure 7054. See Walther, 738 F.2d at 1067.
Love’s request to treat this appeal as a petition under 28 U.S.C. § 1651, set forth in her opening brief, is denied.
DISMISSED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
698 F. App'x 462, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/lee-ann-love-v-johnny-wiseman-ca9-2017.