Court Opinion

ID: 19413
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2010-04-25 07:24:17+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:37:18.978164
License: Public Domain

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                       FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
                      _______________________

                             No. 99-10040
                       _______________________

IN THE MATTER OF: BILLY RAY DELP, JR.,

                                                                    Debtor.

HBF FINANCIAL, LTD.,

                                                                  Appellee,

                                 versus

BILLY RAY DELP, JR.,

                                                              Appellant.

_________________________________________________________________

           Appeal from the United States District Court
                for the Northern District of Texas
                          (4:96-CV-235-Y)
_________________________________________________________________

                          December 14, 1999

Before JONES, BARKSDALE, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

          This court has carefully considered the briefs, oral

arguments of counsel, and the lower courts’ orders in order to

determine whether we have appellate jurisdiction.       The parties are

well aware of this court’s settled jurisprudence that when a

district court, sitting in review of a bankruptcy court judgment,

remands the case to the bankruptcy court for significant further

proceedings,   this   court   lacks   jurisdiction   over   the   district

court’s order. See, e.g., Beal Bank, S.S.B. v. Caddo Parish-Villas

     *
      Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the Court has determined that
this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except
under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4.
South, Ltd., (Matter of Caddo Parish-Villas South, Ltd.), 174 F.3d
624 (5th Cir. 1999).          Viewed in light of this jurisprudence, it

appears to us that the district court’s opinion on appeal intended

to   remand     this   case    for   some   type   of   significant   further

proceedings in the bankruptcy court. This conclusion is reinforced

by the district court’s pointed reference to the fact that the

bankruptcy court “did not base its ruling on any of the other

arguments raised in Delp’s brief.”

              Accordingly,    this   appeal   is   DISMISSED   for    lack   of

jurisdiction.

                                        2