STEPHEN HARRIS V. UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT, No. 10-56473 (9th Cir. 2012)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

FILED NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FEB 10 2012 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT STEPHEN T. HARRIS; DAVID WOOLSEY, Petitioners - Appellants, No. 10-56473 D.C. No. 2:10-cv-02964-JVSVBK v. MEMORANDUM * UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT, CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, Respondent - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of California James V. Selna, District Judge, Presiding Submitted February 8, 2012 ** Pasadena, California Before: D.W. NELSON, O SCANNLAIN, and N.R. SMITH, Circuit Judges. * This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3. ** The panel unanimously concludes that this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). Appellants Stephen Harris and David Woolsey seek to compel the bankruptcy court to provide a hearing to challenge a temporary restraining order requiring them to produce certain evidence for imaging. The bankruptcy court s order complied with the requirements for issuing an ex parte temporary restraining order, see Fed. R. Civ. P. 65(b), and presents no Fourth Amendment problems. Thus, the district court properly denied appellants petition for a writ of mandamus. See Burlington N. & Santa Fe Ry. Co. v. U.S. Dist. Ct., 408 F.3d 1142, 1146 (9th Cir. 2005). Appellants also contend that the district court erred by imposing sanctions on appellants attorney in the form of attorneys fees to opposing counsel. The notice of appeal does not list their attorney as an appellant or otherwise make clear that the sanction order is being appealed. See Fed. R. App. P. 3(c)(1)(A), (c)(4). We thus lack jurisdiction to disturb the sanction order. AFFIRMED. 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.