Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_24-cv-03246/USCOURTS-caed-2_24-cv-03246-0/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

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

In re LYNN DEE HARRINGTON,

Debtor,

LYNN DEE HARRINGTON,

Appellant-Defendant,

v.

EL DORADO COUNTY,

Appellee-Plaintiff.

No. 2:24-03246-DAD

Appeal from the United States Bankruptcy 

Court for the Eastern District of California, 

Christopher M. Klein, Bankruptcy Judge

Bankruptcy Petition No. 19-26964-A-7

Adversary Proceeding No. 20-02017-C

ORDER GRANTING EX PARTE 

APPLICATION TO TRANSFER THIS 

APPEAL TO THE BANKRUPTCY 

APPELLATE PANEL

(Doc. No. 5)

This matter is before the court on appellant’s ex parte application to transfer this action to 

the United States Bankruptcy Appellate Panel of the Ninth Circuit (“the BAP”). (Doc. No. 5.) 

On November 21, 2024, appellant filed a notice of bankruptcy appeal in this court. (Doc. No. 1.) 

Appellant also filed an opening letter in this appeal on November 22, 2024. (Doc. No. 2.) On 

December 6, 2024, appellant filed the pending ex parte application to transfer this action. (Doc. 

No. 5.)

In her ex parte application, appellant represents that her counsel had “[b]y error . . . 

incorrectly completed Part 4” of the notice of appeal and statement of election, and erroneously

Case 2:24-cv-03246-DAD Document 6 Filed 12/09/24 Page 1 of 2
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

2

selected this appeal to be heard by the United States District Court rather than by the BAP. (Doc. 

No. 5 at 1.) She further represents that on November 21, 2024, she filed an amended notice of 

appeal and statement of election which was “amended as to [the] Part 4 Election and changed the 

election to the [BAP].” (Doc. No. 5 at 2.) A review of the current notice of appeal on this court’s 

docket verifies that Part 4 of that filing indicates that appellant does not elect to have her appeal 

heard by this court and instead wishes the BAP to hear her appeal. (Doc. No. 1 at 4.) Appellant 

states that she “has been advised by the Bankruptcy Court Clerk’s Office staff[] that an 

application to the United States District Court Judge is required to have the case transferred to 

[the BAP].” (Doc. No. 5 at 2.)

Accordingly,

1. The appellant’s ex parte application to transfer this action to the United States 

Bankruptcy Appellate Panel of the Ninth Circuit (Doc. No. 5) is granted;

2. The court hereby transfers this action to the United States Bankruptcy Appellate 

Panel of the Ninth Circuit;

3. The court further directs the Clerk of the Court for the Eastern District of 

California in Sacramento to forward all filings in this action to the United States 

Bankruptcy Appellate Panel of the Ninth Circuit; and

4. The Clerk of the Court for the Eastern District of California shall close this case 

upon completion of the transfer.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: December 6, 2024 

DALE A. DROZD

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 2:24-cv-03246-DAD Document 6 Filed 12/09/24 Page 2 of 2