Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

Walkup v. Carpenter, 93-1749 (1994)

Court: Court of Appeals for the First Circuit Number: 93-1749 Visitors: 12
Filed: Jan. 27, 1994
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: January 27, 1994 [NOT FOR PUBLICATION] UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT ___________________ No. 93-1749 GERALDINE MARIE WALKUP, Plaintiff, Appellant, v. M. ELLEN CARPENTER, Defendant, Appellee. See Bankruptcy ___ Rule 8002(a). __ The appeal is dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.
USCA1 Opinion









January 27, 1994 [NOT FOR PUBLICATION]

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT


___________________


No. 93-1749




GERALDINE MARIE WALKUP,

Plaintiff, Appellant,

v.

M. ELLEN CARPENTER,

Defendant, Appellee.

__________________

APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS

[Hon. William G. Young, U.S. District Judge]
___________________

___________________

Before

Breyer, Chief Judge,
___________
Selya and Cyr, Circuit Judges.
______________

___________________

Geraldine Marie Walkup on brief pro se.
______________________
M. Ellen Carpenter, Leila R. Kern, and Kern, Hagerty, Roach
__________________ _____________ ____________________
& Carpenter, P.C. on brief for appellee.
_________________



__________________

__________________



















Per Curiam. This case is before us on appeal from
__________

an order of the United States District Court for the District

of Massachusetts affirming a decision of the bankruptcy court

allowing a motion to sell property. The bankruptcy court

order was entered on the docket sheet on January 14, 1993.

Appellant Walkup did not file her notice of appeal until

February 17, 1993, twenty-three days after the ten day period

for filing a notice of appeal had expired. See Bankruptcy
___

Rule 8002(a). Timely filing of a notice of appeal pursuant

to Rule 8002 is mandatory and jurisdictional. In re
______

Abdallah, 778 F.2d 75, 77 (1st Cir. 1985), cert. denied, 476
________ ____________

U.S. 1116 (1986). Accordingly, the untimely notice of appeal

deprived the district court of jurisdiction to review the

bankruptcy court order. Furthermore, we lack jurisdiction to

review the issues on appeal, since our jurisdiction to do so

is dependent upon a proper exercise of jurisdiction below.

Id.
__

The appeal is dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.

The order of the district court is hereby vacated, and the

case is remanded so that the district court may enter an

order dismissing the appeal.











-2-







Source:  CourtListener

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer