The Clerk of the Court is instructed to a mend the official c aption, including theabbreviated * caption, in this case to c onform to the listing of theparties a bove. 09- 4419
- bk I n re Jac ob UNI TED S TATES CO URT O F AP PEALS F O R T H E S E C O N D C IR C U IT S UM M ARY OR DER
R U L I N G S B Y S U M M A R Y OR D E R D O N OT HA V E P R E C E D E N T I A L E F F E C T . CI T AT I ON T O A S UM M ARY ORDE R FI L E D ON OR AF T E R J ANUARY 1 , 2 0 0 7 , I S PE RM I T T E D AND I S GOVE RNE D BY FED ERA L R U LE O F A PPELLA TE PR O C EDU R E 32 . 1 A N D TH I S C O U R T’ S LO C A L RU LE 32 . 1. W H EN C I TI N G A S U M M A R Y O R D ER I N A D O C U M ENT FI LED W I TH TH I S C O U R T , A P A R T Y M U ST C I TE E I T HE R T HE F E D E RAL A P P E N D I X OR A N E L E C T R ON I C D A T A B A S E ( W I T H T HE N OT A T I ON “ S UM M ARY ORDE R” ) . A PA RT Y CI T I NG A S UM M ARY ORDE R M US T S E RVE A COPY O F I T O N ANY P A R T Y N O T R E P R E S E N T E D B Y C O U N S E L . A ta s t at ed t erm of the U ni t ed St at es C our t of A ppeal s for t he Second C i r cui t , hel d at the D ani el Pat r i ck M oyni han U ni t ed S t at es C our t hous e, 500 Pear l St r eet , i n t he C i t yof N ew Y or k, on t he 25 dayof J une, t w o t hous and t en. th P RES ENT : ROGER J
. M I NER,

J O H N M . W A L K E R , J R ., GE RA RD E
. L YNC H,

C i r cui tJudges
.

--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- I N R E J AM E S R. J AC OB J R. a n d KI M BE RL Y A. J AC OB D ebtors

--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- J AM E S R. J AC OB J R. a n d KI M BE RL Y A. J AC OB Appel l ees , v. N o. 09- 4419- bk M AR K W
. SW I M ELAR , TRU STEE , Ap p e lla n t. *

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- F OR AP P E L L ANT : MA X S E N D A V I D C H AM P I ON, E S Q. , L a w Of f i c e o f M a rk W. S wi me l a r , S yr a c u s e , NY FO R A PPELL EE: C R A IG C
. H U M P L E B Y , E S Q
. , H um plebyL aw O ffi ces, S yr a c u s e , NY 1 A ppeal fr om an O ct ober16, 2009, O r derof the U ni t ed St at es D i s t r i ctC our tfort he 2 N o rt h e rn D is tr ic t o f N e w Y o rk (D a v id N . H u rd , Judge ) r ever s i ng t he or derof the B ankrupt cy2 1 C our tforthe N or t hern D i s t r i ct of N ew Y or k di s m i s s i ng appel l ees ’ bankrupt cypet i t i on and 2 re m a n d in g th e m a tte r t o th e B a n k ru p tc yC o u rt ( S t e p h e n D . G e rl in g , C hi ef B ankr upt cy 3 Judge ). 4 UP ON DUE CO NS I DE RA T I ON, I T I S HE RE BY OR DE RE D, ADJ UDGE D, AND 5 D E C R E E D th a t th e a p p e a l is D IS M IS S E D f o r l a c k o f

ju ri s d ic tio n . 6 O n M a rc h 1 5 , 2 0 0 7 , d e b t o rs -a p p e lle e s , K im b e rl yA . J a c o b a n d J a m e s R . J a c o b J r., 7 fil ed fo r b an k rup tcy u n d er C h ap ter 1 3 in th e U n it ed S tat es B an k rup tcyC o u rtfo r th e N o rth ern 8 D i s tr i ctof N ew Y or k. T he bankrupt cyt rus t ee, appel l antM ark W
. Sw i m elar, fi l ed an 9 o b jecti o n to the co n firm ati o n o f th e d e b to rs ’ reo rga n izati o n p lan, arg u ing that the d eb tors 1 0 w er e notent i t l ed t o exemptfr om t he bankrupt cyes t at e an a nnui t yfr om w hi ch J ames J acob 1 1 r ece i ved mont hl ypaym ent s . O n Sept ember 16, 2008, t he bankrupt cycour tagr eed w i t h t he 1 2 tru ste e ’s a rg u m e n t an d d ism iss e d d e b to rs’ f ili n g . T h e d e b to rs a p p e a led to th e d istric t co u rt, 1 3 w h ich o n O ctob er 1 9 , 2 0 0 9 , rev erse d the b an k rup tcyco u rt ’s ord er, reje cti n g the trustee ’s 1 4 a rg u m e n t c o n c e rn in g th e a n n u ity a n d re m a n d in g th e m a tter to th e b a n k ru p tcy co u rt f o r it to 1 5 con si der w hethert o co nfirm t he debtor s’ plan. T he trust ee no w app eal s, aski ng us t o reverse 1 6 the d istri ct co u rtan d af firm the b an k rup tcyco u rt ’s origin al ord er. 1 7 E ven w her e the i s s ue i s notr ai sed byt he part i es , w e mustdet erm i ne n o str a sp o n te 1 8 w hether a di s t r i ct cour t ’ s or der r emandi ng a cas e t o a bankrupt cycour ti s a fi nal or derand 1 9 th e re f

o re a p p e a la b le u n d e r 2 8 U .S .C
. § 1 5 8 (d ). D ico la v . A m . S tea m sh ip O w n e rs Mu t. P ro t. 20 a n d

In d e m n ity A s s o c ., In c . (In r e P r u d e n tia l L in e s , In c .) , 5 9 F
. 3 d 3 2 7 , 3 3 1 (2d C ir
. 1 9 9 5 ). 2 1 T he di s m i s s al of the bankrupt cyfi l i ng byt he bankrupt cycour t w as cl ear l ya fi nal or derand3 1 w as ther efor e appe al abl e t o t he di s t r i ct cour t . H ow ever , even i n cas es w her e the under l y i ng 2 b a n k ru p t c y c o u r td e c i s i o n i s f i n a l a n d a p p e a l a b l e , “ t h e d i s t r i c tc o u r t ’ s d i s p o s i t i o n [ m a y] 3 i ndepende nt l yr ender [ ] t he mat t ernonappea l abl e. ” B ow ers v. C onn. N at ’ lB ank , 847 F. 2d 4 1019, 1022 ( 2d C i r . 1988)
. “W her e the di s tr i ctcourt’ s d ec isi o n i s t o vaca t e a ba nkrupt cy 5 cour t ’ s or derand r emand t he ac t i on t o t he bankrupt cy cour t , t hat deci s i on i s noti t s el f fi nal 6 [forappea l purpos es ] i f i tr emands the ca s e t o the bankrupt cyj udge fors i gni fi cantfur ther 7 pr ocee di ngs . ” I

n r e Penn Traf

f i c C o. , 466 F
. 3 d 7 5 , 7 8 ( 2d C i r . 2006) ( i nt ernal quot at i on 8 m arks and br acke t s om i t t ed) , quot i ng L T V C o r p . v . Fa r r a g h e r(In r e C h a te a u g a y C o r p .) , 838 9 F
. 2 d 5 9 , 6 1 -62 (2d C ir
. 1 9 8 8 ). E v en w h ere n o fu rth er f ac t fi n d ing b ythe b an k rup tcyco u rt 1 0 i s nece s s ary , an or derof r emand t hatcal l s for t he bankrupt cy cour t t o exer ci s e j udgm entor 1 1 d is c re tio n is n o t a p p e a la b le
. Id
. at79. 1 2 In th is c a se , the d istric t co u r t r e m a n d e d th e m a tter to th e b a n k ru p tcy co u rt w ith 1 3 i ns truct i ons t o c o n s i d e rwhe th e rth e d e b t o r s ’ p r o pos ed r eor gani zat i on pl an metthe l i qui dat i on 1 4 t es tof 11 U
. S. C
. § 1325( a) ( 4) and or der ed i tt o cons i deri n par t i cul arw hethera port ion of 1 5 th e c o n t e s t e d a n n u i t yp a yme n t s mi g h tb e s u b j e c t t o c l a i ms b y u n s e c u r e d c r e d i t o r s u n d e rN. Y. 1 6 In s. L a w § 3 2 1 2 (d )(2 ). S in c e th e se in stru c tio n s e x p licitly re q u ire d th e b a n k ru p tcy co u rt to 1 7 e x e rc ise its ju d g m e n t an d d isc re tio n , the d istric t co u rt’s o rd e r is n o t ap p e a lab le to th is c o u rt. 1 8 F o r t he fo regoi ng reas on s, t his app eal i s D ISM ISS E D for l ack o f app ellate 1 9 j ur i s di ct i on. 2 0 FOR TH E CO UR T: 2 1 C A T H E R IN E O ’H A G A N W O L F E , C lerk o f C o u rt 22 23 24