Tremont Tower Condominium LLC v. Lehman Brothers Holdings, Inc. , 173 F. App'x 11 ( 2006 )

Not for Publication in West's Federal Reporter
Citation Limited Pursuant to 1st Cir. Loc. R. 32.3
United States Court of Appeals
For the First Circuit
No. 05-9005
IN RE: TREMONT TOWER CONDOMINIUM LLC,
Debtor,
__________________
WILLIAM T. MATT, ET AL.,
Appellants,
v.
LEHMAN BROTHERS HOLDINGS, INC., ET AL.,
Appellees.
ON APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY APPELLATE PANEL
FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT
Before
Boudin, Chief Judge,
Campbell and Stahl, Senior Circuit Judges.
William T. Matt on brief pro se.
Seth H. Salinger on brief for the appellants WT Matt
Development Corp., and WT Matt Holding LLC.
Andrew M. Troop, Christopher M. Mirick and Weil, Gotshal &
Manges LLP on brief for appellees Lehman Brothers Holdings, Inc.,
and Tremont Tower Residences LLC.
April 3, 2006
Per Curiam. William Matt, WT Matt Holding, LLC and WT
Matt Development Corporation appeal from decisions by the
Bankruptcy Appellate Panel (BAP), which dismissed their appeal
from a bankruptcy court decision and denied rehearing. We
dismiss the appeal by William Matt and reject the appeal by the
corporate appellants as meritless. We also address a pending
motion by the appellees.
Insofar as Matt is concerned, we agree substantially
with the reasoning by the BAP, which concluded that he lacks
standing to pursue the appeal. Thus, his appeal should be
dismissed. Spenlinhauer v. O'Donnell, 261 F.3d 113, 118 (1st
Cir. 2001).
Regarding the corporate appellants, we find no error or
abuse of discretion by the BAP, which reasonably dismissed the
appeal and denied rehearing. As the BAP said, the companies
failed to timely have an attorney enter an appearance on their
behalf. In addition, Matt, who had urged -- essentially up to
the time of oral argument -- that he should be allowed to
represent his companies, failed to raise on appeal the only
appellate issue the companies had. Neither his statement of
issues nor his brief alleged that the bankruptcy court had erred
in striking their pleadings for lack of representation.
In any event, even if the BAP had considered the merits
of the appellants' appeal, it is plain that it would have
-2-
affirmed the bankruptcy court and that this court, in its turn,
would have done the same. The bankruptcy court properly struck
the companies' pleadings because they had not been filed by an
attorney. See In re Las Colinas Development Corp., 585 F.2d 7,
11 (1st Cir. 1978) (confirming the general rule that a corporate
entity may not pursue litigation except through an attorney).
Appellees Lehman Brothers Holdings, Inc. and Tremont
Tower Residences, LLC, move to amend the caption of this appeal
to list only them as appellees. We grant their motion. The
other persons named in the caption are defendants in the
adversary proceeding, but not appellees to this appeal.
We dismiss the appeal by William Matt and affirm the
BAP's February 10, 2005 decision dismissing the corporate
appellants' appeal and its March 10, 2005 order denying
rehearing. We grant the motion to amend the caption as indicated
herein.
-3-