Cert Grant on Finality of Orders Denying Bankruptcy-Stay Relief
The Supreme Court granted cert this morning in Ritzen Group Inc. v. Jackson Masonry, LLC. The case asks whether an order denying relief from a bankruptcy stay is final and appealable.
When a debtor files for bankruptcy, most litigation against that debtor is automatically stayed. But those with claims against the debtor can petition for relief from that stay so they can pursue their claims.
In Ritzen Group, a creditor’s breach-of-contract claim against a debtor was automatically stayed when the debtor filed for bankruptcy. The creditor sought relief from the automatic stay, which the bankruptcy court denied. The creditor did not immediately appeal that decision. It instead pursued its breach-of-contract claim in the bankruptcy court and, after losing, sought to appeal both the denial of relief from the stay and the merits to the district court. The district court held that it lacked appellate jurisdiction over the denial of stay relief.
On further appeal to the Sixth Circuit, the court held that the denial of relief from the stay was a final order entered in a bankruptcy proceeding under 28 U.S.C. § 158(a), the jurisdictional statute for bankruptcy appeals. The denial was thus final and appealable at the time it was entered. At that point, the creditor could—indeed, had to—appeal the denial of relief. Because it did not do so within the 14-day period for filing a notice of appeal in bankruptcy, its later appeal was untimely. The Sixth Circuit accordingly affirmed the district court’s dismissal the appeal.
The Supreme Court granted cert to decide whether a bankruptcy court order denying relief from an automatic stay is final and thus appealable under § 158(a).
I’m sure I’ll be writing more about this case in the future. For now, here are some helpful links for anyone who want to read up on the case:
- Supreme Court Docket, No. 18-938
- Cert Petition
- Opposition Brief
- Reply Brief
- In re Jackson Masonry, LLC, 906 F.3d 494 (6th Cir. 2018): Slip Opinion, Google Scholar, Westlaw
- SCOTUSBlog Coverage
Final Decisions PLLC is an appellate boutique and consultancy that focuses on federal appellate jurisdiction. We partner with lawyers facing appellate-jurisdiction issues, working as consultants or co-counsel to achieve positive outcomes on appeal. Contact us to learn how we can work together.
Learn More ContactRelated Posts
In In re Al Zawawi, the Eleventh Circuit held that a bankruptcy court order recognizing a foreign proceeding is final and thus appealable.
Continue reading....
Appellate jurisdiction in bankruptcy cases can be tricky. The rules governing finality are different. And there’s an an extra tier of intermediate appellate review, with cases first going to a district court or Bankruptcy Appellate Panel before they can reach the courts of appeals. Litigants can skip this extra tier of review and proceed straight […]
Continue reading....
Appellate jurisdiction in bankruptcy cases can get complicated. The rules of finality are different in bankruptcy. And bankruptcy involves an extra tier of intermediate appellate review: litigants initially appeal bankruptcy court decisions to either a district court or a Bankruptcy Appellate Panel. Litigants can then seek further review in the courts of appeals. As a […]
Continue reading....
In In re Tennial, the Sixth Circuit held that bankruptcy’s 14-day deadline for filing an appeal is not jurisdictional. In doing so, the court split with every other court of appeals to address this issue. The Supreme Court has drawn a fairly clear line between deadlines found in statutes—which are jurisdictional—and those found only in […]
Continue reading....
In In re Marino, the Ninth Circuit held that it lacked jurisdiction to review a Bankruptcy Appellate Panel decision that remanded the dispute back to the bankruptcy court. The opinion provides a nice summary of the Ninth Circuit’s law on appealing bankruptcy remands. These remands mean further proceedings in the bankruptcy court. And the parties […]
Continue reading....Recent Posts
In two appeals—Clark v. Louisville-Jefferson County Metro Government and Salter v. City of Detroit, the Sixth Circuit spoke at length about its jurisdiction to review certain Brady issues as part of qualified-immunity appeals. The cases produced a total of six opinions, several of which dove into this jurisdictional issue.
Continue reading....
In Rossy v. City of Buffalo, the Second Circuit appeared to both dismiss a qualified-immunity appeal for a lack of jurisdiction and exercise pendent appellate jurisdiction over a plaintiff’s cross-appeal. This is odd. Pendent appellate jurisdiction allows normally non-appealable issues to tag along with appealable ones. But if the denial of qualified immunity was not […]
Continue reading....
I’ve frequently written about the problem of fact-based qualified-immunity appeals both on this website and in my research. I recently decided to collect some new data on how much needless delay these appeals add to civil-rights litigation. I had done something similar a few years ago when writing about the need to sanction defendants for […]
Continue reading....
Yesterday, I filed an amicus brief in support of the petitioner in Parrish v. United States, which is currently pending before the Supreme Court. The case asks if an appellant must file a new notice of appeal after the district court reopens the time to appeal under Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 4(a)(6). Both the […]
Continue reading....
Last month saw another rejection of pure Bivens appeals, an analysis of Perlman appeals in the grand-jury context, and a ruling on mandatory stays during a remand appeal. Plus an odd sovereign-immunity appeal, appeals without the express resolution of all claims, and much more.
Continue reading....