1. Home
  2. Browse Decisions
  3. F.3d
  4. 85 F.3d
  5. 85 F.3d 416 (1996)
 

IN RE SCHIMMELS

No. 95-15974.

85 F.3d 416 (1996)

In re H. Edwin SCHIMMELS; Mary Jo Schimmels, Debtors. UNITED STATES of America ex rel. Stephen RUDD; Mark Lanterman; Deborah Gibson; Henry Winburn, and Howard L. Hamby, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. H. Edwin SCHIMMELS; Mary Jo Schimmels, Defendants-Appellees.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Decided May 30, 1996.

Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Daniel S. Kozma, Connerton, Ray & Simon, Washington, DC, for plaintiffs-appellants.

Alan R. Smith, Smith & Cope, Reno, Nevada, for defendants-appellees.

Before HUG, Chief Judge, D. W. NELSON and FERNANDEZ, Circuit Judges.

HUG, Chief Judge:

This case asks us to determine whether the appellants' untimely filing of their notice of appeal is excused because the bankruptcy court failed to follow the separate judgment rule of Bankruptcy Rule 9021. The appellants missed the deadline to file their notice of appeal in bankruptcy court, and the district court determined that it was accordingly without jurisdiction to entertain the appeal and dismissed the action. The appellants now contend that...

Let's get started

Leagle.com

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.

  • Updated daily.
  • Uncompromising quality.
  • Complete, Accurate, Current.

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases