Filed: Feb. 07, 2018
Latest Update: Mar. 03, 2020
Summary: FILED United States Court of Appeals UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS Tenth Circuit FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT February 7, 2018 _ Elisabeth A. Shumaker Clerk of Court GALEN LEMAR AMERSON; FRANCES MOORER SCOTT, Petitioners - Appellants, v. No. 17-1406 (D.C. No. 1:17-CV-02177-RBJ) UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY (D. Colo.) COURT, District of Colorado, Respondent - Appellee. _ ORDER AND JUDGMENT* _ Before MATHESON, KELLY, and MURPHY, Circuit Judges.** _ Plaintiffs-Appellants Frances Moorer Scott and Galen Lemar
Summary: FILED United States Court of Appeals UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS Tenth Circuit FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT February 7, 2018 _ Elisabeth A. Shumaker Clerk of Court GALEN LEMAR AMERSON; FRANCES MOORER SCOTT, Petitioners - Appellants, v. No. 17-1406 (D.C. No. 1:17-CV-02177-RBJ) UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY (D. Colo.) COURT, District of Colorado, Respondent - Appellee. _ ORDER AND JUDGMENT* _ Before MATHESON, KELLY, and MURPHY, Circuit Judges.** _ Plaintiffs-Appellants Frances Moorer Scott and Galen Lemar A..
More
FILED
United States Court of Appeals
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS Tenth Circuit
FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT February 7, 2018
_________________________________
Elisabeth A. Shumaker
Clerk of Court
GALEN LEMAR AMERSON; FRANCES
MOORER SCOTT,
Petitioners - Appellants,
v. No. 17-1406
(D.C. No. 1:17-CV-02177-RBJ)
UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY (D. Colo.)
COURT, District of Colorado,
Respondent - Appellee.
_________________________________
ORDER AND JUDGMENT*
_________________________________
Before MATHESON, KELLY, and MURPHY, Circuit Judges.**
_________________________________
Plaintiffs-Appellants Frances Moorer Scott and Galen Lemar Amerson appeal
from the district court’s judgment denying their petition for a writ of mandamus and
dismissing the case with prejudice. Having jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, we
affirm.
The petitioners sought an order directing the clerk of the bankruptcy court to
transfer that court’s files to the district court for the purpose of a de novo review of
*
This order and judgment is not binding precedent, except under the doctrines
of law of the case, res judicata, and collateral estoppel. It may be cited, however, for
its persuasive value consistent with Fed. R. App. P. 32.1 and 10th Cir. R. 32.1.
**
After examining the briefs and appellate record, this panel has determined
unanimously that oral argument would not materially assist in the determination of
this appeal. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2); 10th Cir. R. 34.1(G). The case is therefore
ordered submitted without oral argument.
certain bankruptcy court orders. The district court viewed the petition as either an
untimely attempt to appeal a bankruptcy order (and reconsideration) or a motion to
withdraw the reference to the bankruptcy court. The district court also noted that the
underlying issues had been resolved against petitioners. See In re Amerson,
839 F.3d
1290 (10th Cir. 2016), cert. denied sub nom. Scott v. King,
138 S. Ct. 121 (2017).
For substantially the same reasons, the judgment is
AFFIRMED.
Entered for the Court
Paul J. Kelly, Jr.
Circuit Judge
2