In Re John F. Anwiler, Debtor.martha Anwiler; John F. Anwiler, Appellants, v. Martha Anwiler, Defendant-appellant,timothy Cohelan, Appellee, 980 F.2d 736 (9th Cir. 1992)
Annotate this CaseBefore SCHROEDER, FLETCHER and NOONAN, Circuit Judges.
MEMORANDUM**
John F. Anwiler and Martha Anwiler appeal pro se the Bankruptcy Appellate Panel's (BAP) order denying their motion for leave to appeal an interlocutory order of the bankruptcy court. We dismiss for lack of jurisdiction.
"Jurisdiction of an appeal from an order of a bankruptcy court is governed by 28 U.S.C. § 158." Allen v. Old Nat'l Bank (In re Allen), 896 F.2d 416, 418 (9th Cir. 1990) (per curiam). Pursuant to section 158(d), this court has jurisdiction over final decisions, judgments, orders, and decrees entered either by the district court or BAP under subsections (a) and (b) of section 158 respectively. Allen, 896 F.2d at 418. Interlocutory orders of the bankruptcy court may be reviewed only at the discretion of the district court or BAP. See 28 U.S.C. § 158(a) & (b).
Here, the BAP denied discretionary review of an interlocutory bankruptcy court order. See id. This court lacks jurisdiction to review such orders. See 28 U.S.C. § 158(d); Allen, 896 F.2d at 418.
DISMISSED.1
The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. Fed. R. App. P. 34(a); 9th Cir.R. 34-4
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by 9th Cir.R. 36-3
The Anwilers contend in passing that this court has jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1293(b) and the doctrine announced in Gillespie v. United States Steel Corp., 379 U.S. 148 (1964). These contentions lack merit
Section 1293(b) is no longer effective and has been replaced by 28 U.S.C. § 158. See Allen, 896 F.2d at 418 n. 3. In addition, application of the Supreme Court's holding in Gillespie is limited to cases involving the specific circumstances that were present in that case. See Branson, 912 F.2d at 336. Those circumstances are not present here.
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.
