Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_08-cv-00440/USCOURTS-caed-2_08-cv-00440-4/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 422
Nature of Suit: Bankruptcy Appeals Rule 28 USC 158
Cause of Action: 28:1334 Bankruptcy Appeal

---

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

----oo0oo----

In re

BETSEY WARREN LEBBOS,

NO. CIV. S 08-0440 FCD KJM

Debtor. BAP No. 08-1032

BANKR. CT. NO. 06-2225

_____________________/ MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

BETSEY WARREN LEBBOS,

Appellant,

v.

LINDA S. SCHUETTE, Trustee; 

UNITED STATES TRUSTEE,

Appellees. _____________________ ----oo0oo----

On April 2, 2008, the court issued a Memorandum and Order

(“Order”), denying Appellant Betsey Warren Lebbos’ motion to

proceed in forma pauperis (“IFP”) based upon a Notice of Order

Vacating Transfer of IFP Motion (“Vacate Order”), filed on 

April 2, 2008. However, this Order was mistakenly filed and does

Case 2:08-cv-00440-FCD-KJM Document 24 Filed 04/07/08 Page 1 of 3
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

1 The confusion regarding these two appeals by Appellant

Lebbos to the BAP and subsequent transfer of the appeals from the

BAP to the district court for review of the IFP motions is

clarified in the letter to the court from the BAP, filed 

April 4, 2008. (Letter [Docket #18], filed Apr. 4, 2008).

2

not apply to the pending motion before this court to proceed IFP. 

The IFP application before this court applies to Appellant’s

appeal of an order by the bankruptcy judge, filed 

January 17, 2008, regarding her motion to dismiss, which was

filed on December 10, 2007. The Vacate Order did not apply to

this case but rather, to another appeal filed by Appellant of an

order by the bankruptcy judge, also filed January 17, 2008,

regarding her motion to terminate the trustee, filed on 

December 13, 2007.1 Therefore, because the court’s denial of the

IFP application in this case was premised on the Vacate Order

which applied to a separate appeal by Appellant Lebbos, this

court’s April 2, 2008 Order is VACATED.

In reviewing the docket in this matter, the court notes that

the Notice of a Motion to transfer appeal to District Court and

Notice of Motion to proceed IFP (“IFP motion”) [Docket #4], which

was filed on March 17, 2008, is unrelated to the Notice of

Bankruptcy Appeal [Docket #1], which opened this case. The Clerk

of Court is directed to open a miscellaneous case for the sole

purpose of reviewing the IFP application as directed by the

United States Bankruptcy Appellate Panel (the “BAP”). As such,

Docket #4 shall be the opening document of this new miscellaneous

case. The Clerk shall also transfer Docket #8, Docket #9, 

Docket #11, Docket #18, Docket #21 and this order to the new

miscellaneous case.

Case 2:08-cv-00440-FCD-KJM Document 24 Filed 04/07/08 Page 2 of 3
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

3

 Moreover, in light of this order, the court again

specifically refers the instant case to a magistrate judge for

the limited purpose of review and approval/disapproval of the IFP

application. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: April 7, 2008

 

FRANK C. DAMRELL, Jr.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 2:08-cv-00440-FCD-KJM Document 24 Filed 04/07/08 Page 3 of 3