Opinion ID: 729938
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: jurisdiction

Text: 4 As a threshold matter, we must address the question of appellate jurisdiction. Where a district court has ruled on a bankruptcy matter as an appellate court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 158(a), we have jurisdiction to review the district court's decision if the appeal meets the requirements of, among other statutes, 28 U.S.C. § 158(d) or 28 U.S.C. § 1292. See Connecticut Nat'l Bank v. Germain, 503 U.S. 249, 112 S.Ct. 1146, 117 L.Ed.2d 391 (1992). Because we have appellate jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 158, we need not look to 28 U.S.C. § 1292. Section 158 provides in pertinent part: 5 (a) The district courts of the United States shall have jurisdiction to hear appeals 6 (1) from final judgments, orders, and decrees; [and] 7 . . . . . 8 (3) with leave of the court, from other interlocutory orders and decrees; 9 and, with leave of the court, from interlocutory orders and decrees, of bankruptcy judges entered in cases and proceedings referred to the bankruptcy judges under section 157 of this title.... 10 .... 11 (d) The courts of appeals shall have jurisdiction of appeals from all final decisions, judgments, orders, and decrees entered under subsections (a) and (b) of this section. 12 Thus, while a district court has jurisdiction to hear bankruptcy appeals not only from bankruptcy court orders that are final, but also from orders that are nonfinal if taken with leave of the district court, subsection 158(d) confers appellate jurisdiction in the courts of appeals only over final district court orders. See In re Johns-Manville Corp., 920 F.2d 121, 126 (2d Cir.1990). For purposes of appeal, the concept of finality is more flexible in the bankruptcy context than in ordinary civil litigation. In re Prudential Lines, 59 F.3d 327, 331 (2d Cir.1995).  '[O]rders in bankruptcy cases may be immediately appealed if they finally dispose of discrete disputes within the larger case.'  In re Johns-Manville Corp., 920 F.2d at 126 (quoting In re Saco Local Dev. Corp., 711 F.2d 441, 444 (1st Cir.1983)) (emphasis omitted). 13 An inquiry into appellate jurisdiction under subsection 158(d) consists of two steps: First, we must determine whether the underlying decision of the bankruptcy court was final or interlocutory.... If the decision [of the bankruptcy court] was final, we must then ask whether the district court's disposition independently rendered the matter nonappealable. Bowers v. Connecticut Nat'l Bank, 847 F.2d 1019, 1022 (2d Cir.1988). 14 After a hearing on the possible retention of Keen, the bankruptcy court authorized the trustee to hire Keen as a real estate consultant for the bankruptcy estate. Nothing in the order of the bankruptcy court or its affirmance by the district court indicates any anticipation that the decision will be reconsidered. See In re Johns-Manville Corp., 920 F.2d at 127. Also, the district court, in affirming the bankruptcy court's order, noted that the bankruptcy court's order was a final order. 15 Nothing in the district court's disposition independently rendered the matter nonappealable. The district court did not direct further proceedings in the bankruptcy court. Cf. In re Financial News Network, 931 F.2d 217, 221 (2d Cir.1991) (per curiam). The district court simply affirmed the bankruptcy court's final order. See In re Johns-Manville Corp., 920 F.2d at 127. Therefore, the orders of the bankruptcy court and the district court were both final. Because the issue of whether Bloom can hire his real estate firm was finally decided, the district court's order is appealable under subsection 158(d) and is properly before us.