Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca10-90-01061/USCOURTS-ca10-90-01061-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
William E. Brayshaw
Appellee
H. Christopher Clark
Appellant

Document Text:

PUBLISH 

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS 

TENTH CIRCUIT 

In re: William E. Brayshaw, ) 

) 

Debtor. ) 

) 

H. CHRISTOPHER CLARK, ) 

) 

Trustee-Appellant, ) 

) 

v. ) 

) 

WILLIAM E. BRAYSHAW, ) 

) 

Debtor-Appellee. ) 

FILED 

United State5 Court of Appeals 

Tenth Circuit 

AUG 311990 

ROBERT L. HOECKER 

Clerk 

No. 90-1061 

Appeal from the United States District Court 

for the District of Colorado 

(D.C. No. 89-B-1810·) 

Submitted on the briefs: 

Paul G. Quinn, Denver, Colorado, for trustee-appellant. 

Paul D. Rubner and Larry A. Sigman of Rubner & Kutner, Denver, 

Colorado, for debtor-appellee. 

Before LOGAN,·SEYMOUR, and TACHA, Circuit Judges. 

LOGAN, Circuit Judge. 

Appellate Case: 90-1061 Document: 01019382066 Date Filed: 08/31/1990 Page: 1 
H. Christopher Clark, the trustee in this Chapter 7 

bankruptcy proceeding, appeals the district court's order that 

reversed an extension of time the bankruptcy court granted the 

trustee to file objections to exemptions claimed by the debtor, 

William E. Brayshaw. 1 

Debtor filed his bankruptcy petition on May 10, 1989, 

claiming exempt property, pursuant to 11 u.s.c~ § 522(1). Under 

that section, property claimed as exempt automatically becomes 

exempt unless a party objects. Fed. R. Bankr. P. 4003(b) provides 

that objections must be filed within thirty days after the meeting 

of creditors, "unless, within such period, further time is granted 

by the court." The trustee here filed a motion to extend the time 

for objections within the thirty-day period, actually on the 

thirtieth day after the creditor's meeting, and the bankruptcy 

court granted the motion after its expiration. The district court 

granted the debtor leave to take an interlocutory appeal under 28 

u.s.c. § 158(a) and reversed the bankruptcy court's extension 

order. 

There are two issues on this appeal: (1) whether the 

district court's order is an appealable final order; and 

(2) whether the bankruptcy court had power to grant a motion to 

extend time for objections under Rule 4003(b) after expiration of 

the designated thirty-day time period, provided the motion was 

1 After exam1n1ng the briefs and appellate record, this panel has 

determined unanimously that oral argument would not materially 

assist the determination of this appeal. See Fed. R. App. P. 

34(a); lOth Cir. R. 34.1.9. The case is therefore ordered submitted without oral argument. 

-2-

Appellate Case: 90-1061 Document: 01019382066 Date Filed: 08/31/1990 Page: 2 
filed within the period. 

I 

We have jurisdiction in bankruptcy cases only over final 

orders of district courts when they have exercised appellate 

jurisdiction. See 28 u.s.c. § 158(d); Kaiser Steel Corp. v. 

Frates (In re Kaiser Steel Corp.), No. 90-1013, ___ F.2d 

slip op. at 9 (lOth Cir. Aug. 10, 1990). "Grant or denial of a 

claimed exemption is a final appealable order from a bankruptcy 

proceeding." Sumy v. Schlossberg (In re Sumy), 777 F.2d 921, 923 

(4th Cir. 1985) (citing White v. White (In re White), 727 F.2d 

884, 885-86 (9th Cir. 1984)). Although the bankruptcy court order 

extending the time for objections did not finally dispose of the 

status of the debtor's exemptions, the district court's reversal 

of that order had the effect of granting the debtor's claimed 

exemptions and, therefore, is a final appealable order. 

II 

Rule 4003(b) provides that "[t]he trustee . . . may file 

objections to the list of property claimed as exempt within 30 

days after the conclusion of the meeting of creditors • . • 

unless, within such period, further time is granted by the court." 

(Emphasis added). Rule 9006(b) allows enlargement of time 

periods, but specifically provides that "[t]he court may enlarge 

the time for taking action under Rule[] .•• 4003(b) . . • only 

to the extent stated in [that] rule[]." Fed. R. Bankr. P. 

9006(b)(3). The Rules are quite clear on their face, we believe, 

that a bankruptcy court can extend the period for objections to 

exemptions only by acting within the original time period. See 8 

-3-

Appellate Case: 90-1061 Document: 01019382066 Date Filed: 08/31/1990 Page: 3 
Collier on Bankruptcy 11 4003.04[1], at 4003-10 (L. King 15th ed. 

1990). There simply is no room in the wording for construing Rule 

4093(b) or Rule 4006(b) to permit granting an extension of time to 

file objections outside the original thirty-day time limit. We 

recognize that this may cause problems for many bankruptcy courts 

with crowded dockets or when the motion has been filed, as here, 

on the last day. But that is a matter for the drafters of the 

bankruptcy rules, who appear to have thought precise time 

limitations were important in the situation presented here. We 

hold that the bankruptcy court was without power to grant the 

trustee's motion for an extension once the original period 

expired. 

AFFIRMED. 

-4-

Appellate Case: 90-1061 Document: 01019382066 Date Filed: 08/31/1990 Page: 4