Tracy Nixon v. Unknown

Fifth Circuit

Tracy Nixon v. Unknown

521 F. App'x 334

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

DecidedMay 24, 2013

Docket12-11087

StatusUnpublished

This text of 521 F. App'x 334 (Tracy Nixon v. Unknown) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Tracy Nixon v. Unknown, 521 F. App'x 334 (5th Cir. 2013).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM: *

Tracy Shon Nixon (“Nixon”) appeals the district court’s dismissal of his pro se bankruptcy appeal for failure to file a brief within 21 days of entry of the appeal.

A bankruptcy appellant in the Northern District of Texas “shall serve and file a brief within 21 days after entry of the appeal.” N.D. Tex. L.B.R. 8009.1. One authorized remedy for failure to comply with procedural rules is dismissal of the appeal. See Fed. R. Bank. P. 8001(a) (“An appellant’s failure to take any step other than timely filing a notice of appeal does not affect the validity of the appeal, but is ground only for such action as the district court or bankruptcy appellate panel deems appropriate, which may include dismissal of the appeal.”); Ainsworth v. McDonald (In re McDonald), 327 Fed.Appx. 491 (5th Cir.2009) (per curiam) (affirming district court’s dismissal of bankruptcy appeal for appellant’s failure to file a timely initial brief) (collecting cases).

The docket sheet reflects, and Nixon does not dispute, that his brief was filed more than two months after the deadline, and leave to file an out-of-time brief was not granted. His brief on appeal to us does not offer a reason for the untimely filing, argument that dismissal was unwarranted, or authority that the district court abused its discretion by dismissing the case. We AFFIRM.

*

Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

PER CURIAM: *

Tracy Shon Nixon (“Nixon”) appeals the district court’s dismissal of his pro se bankruptcy appeal for failure to file a brief within 21 days of entry of the appeal.

A bankruptcy appellant in the Northern District of Texas “shall serve and file a brief within 21 days after entry of the appeal.” N.D. Tex. L.B.R. 8009.1. One authorized remedy for failure to comply with procedural rules is dismissal of the appeal. See Fed. R. Bank. P. 8001(a) (“An appellant’s failure to take any step other than timely filing a notice of appeal does not affect the validity of the appeal, but is ground only for such action as the district court or bankruptcy appellate panel deems appropriate, which may include dismissal of the appeal.”); Ainsworth v. McDonald (In re McDonald), 327 Fed.Appx. 491 (5th Cir.2009) (per curiam) (affirming district court’s dismissal of bankruptcy appeal for appellant’s failure to file a timely initial brief) (collecting cases).

The docket sheet reflects, and Nixon does not dispute, that his brief was filed more than two months after the deadline, and leave to file an out-of-time brief was not granted. His brief on appeal to us does not offer a reason for the untimely filing, argument that dismissal was unwarranted, or authority that the district court abused its discretion by dismissing the case. We AFFIRM.

*

Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

521 F. App'x 334, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/tracy-nixon-v-unknown-ca5-2013.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack