Opinion ID: 2780845
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: analysis

Text: To determine whether a person or entity has standing to appeal a bankruptcy court’s order, we apply bankruptcy law’s “person aggrieved” doctrine as a prudential standing requirement. Westwood Cmty. Two Ass’n, Inc. v. Barbee (In re Westwood Cmty. Two Ass’n, Inc.), 293 F.3d 1332, 1334-35 (11th Cir. 2002). Under the “person aggrieved” doctrine, a person has standing to appeal only when he is “directly and adversely affected pecuniarily by the order.” Id. at 1335 (quotation omitted). In other words, the person must have a financial stake in the appealed order such that the order “diminishes their property, increases their burdens or impairs their rights.” Id. (quotation omitted).14 The three non-party appellants have not met this requirement here. Non-parties Fisher Limited and Grosvenor’s arguments in favor of their standing are largely based on the erroneous proposition that the bankruptcy court’s summary judgment order “awarded them” to SP Trustees or otherwise bound them as parties. Fisher Limited and Grosvenor are undisputedly the respective parent companies of Fisher Island and Little Rest, two of the Alleged Debtors. The summary judgment order did not disturb Fisher Limited’s or Grosvenor’s claims to 14 In a footnote, this Court noted that this holding was “limited to defining a person aggrieved in this circuit, which is only one of many hurdles a person must overcome to have standing to appeal. The Bankruptcy Code also contains certain procedural requirements, including attendance at bankruptcy hearings, intervention, and filing a notice of appeal within certain time limits.” Id. at 1338 n.8. District Court Judge Williams cited to this footnote to support her application of an “attend and object” prerequisite to standing. 52 Case: 12-15595 Date Filed: 02/20/2015 Page: 53 of 57 ownership over Fisher Island and Little Rest. The order merely named Fisher Limited and Grosvenor as part of the ownership chain for purposes of setting forth who had the authority to appoint counsel to represent alleged debtors Fisher Island and Little Rest in the bankruptcy proceedings. Non-parties Fisher Limited and Grosvenor have not shown the requisite financial stake in the order—it did not diminish their property, increase their burdens, or impair their rights. See In re Westwood, 293 F.3d at 1335. As to non-party Areal, we find no error in the district court’s dismissal of the appeal based on Areal’s failure to show that it was a “person aggrieved” by the bankruptcy court’s summary judgment order. We note that Areal does not contest, as substantive error, any of the district court’s fact findings as to the authenticity of the pledge agreement purportedly showing Areal’s pecuniary interest in Little Rest. Areal submitted no other evidence of its financial stake in the order. Because we conclude that the non-party appellants failed to meet their burden of demonstrating their status as “persons aggrieved,” we need not decide whether attendance and objection in the bankruptcy proceedings is a prerequisite for prudential standing in bankruptcy appeals. See Big Top Koolers, Inc. v. Circus-Man Snacks, Inc., 528 F.3d 839, 844 (11th Cir. 2008) (appellate court can affirm on any ground supported by the record). We also conclude that the three 53 Case: 12-15595 Date Filed: 02/20/2015 Page: 54 of 57 non-party appellants’ remaining arguments lack merit and therefore warrant no further discussion.