PMF Enterprises, Inc. v. Southcrest Bank, No. 15-12931 (11th Cir. 2016)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
Case: 15-12931 Date Filed: 06/10/2016 Page: 1 of 2 [DO NOT PUBLISH] IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT ________________________ No. 15-12931 Non-Argument Calendar ________________________ D.C. Docket Nos. 5:14-cv-00339-MTT; 1:10-bkc-50309-JPS In re: PMF ENTERPRISES, INC., Debtor. ___________________________________________________ PMF ENTERPRISES, INC., Plaintiff - Appellant, versus SOUTHCREST BANK, Defendant - Appellee. ________________________ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of Georgia ________________________ (June 10, 2016) Case: 15-12931 Date Filed: 06/10/2016 Page: 2 of 2 Before MARTIN, JILL PRYOR and ANDERSON, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: Appellant PMF Enterprises, Inc. (“PMF”) appeals the district court’s judgment affirming a bankruptcy court order overruling PMF’s objection to a proof of claim filed by Appellee SouthCrest Bank (“SouthCrest”). After carefully reviewing the record and the parties’ briefs, we affirm the district court’s judgment based on the district court’s well-reasoned order filed on June 1, 2015.1 AFFIRMED. 1 SouthCrest also raises a challenge to our jurisdiction to hear PMF’s appeal. We have recognized that our jurisdiction “in bankruptcy proceedings is limited to final decisions of the district court.” Guy v. Dzikowski (In re Atlas), 210 F.3d 1305, 1307 (11th Cir. 2000); see 28 U.S.C. § 158(d). Because “[a] bankruptcy involves an aggregation of individual controversies,” an order in a bankruptcy case “may be immediately appealed if [it] finally dispose[s] of discrete disputes within the larger case.” Bullard v. Blue Hills Bank, 135 S. Ct. 1686, 1692 (2015). We conclude that the bankruptcy court’s order overruling PMF’s objection was a final decision. It, in effect, allowed SouthCrest’s proof of claim in the amount filed and left no unresolved dispute about the merits of SouthCrest’s claim. See, e.g., Linton v. Grow, 183 B.R. 838, 839 (S.D. Ind. 1995) (recognizing that order overruling objection to claim “resolved the issue of whether [the] claim was accepted” and thus “was a final appealable order”); Allen v. Geneva Steel Co. (In re Geneva Steel Co.), 260 B.R. 517 (B.A.P. 10th Cir. 2001) (“An order on an objection to a claim is a final order . . . .”). 2
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
