Troy Rogers v. Southern Finance L.L.C. ( 2019 )


Menu:
  •      Case: 18-60822      Document: 00515004481         Page: 1    Date Filed: 06/20/2019
    IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
    United States Court of Appeals
    Fifth Circuit
    No. 18-60822                             FILED
    Summary Calendar                       June 20, 2019
    Lyle W. Cayce
    Clerk
    In the Matter of: TROY LEE ROGERS
    Debtor
    SOUTHERN FINANCE L.L.C., SUCCESSOR IN INTEREST TO PIKCO
    FINANCE, INCORPORATED,
    Appellee
    v.
    TROY LEE ROGERS,
    Appellant
    Appeal from the United States District Court
    for the Southern District of Mississippi
    USDC No. 3:18-CV-213
    Before DAVIS, HAYNES, and GRAVES, Circuit Judges.
    PER CURIAM:*
    Southern Finance, L.L.C., one of Troy Lee Roger’s creditors, filed an
    adversary proceeding against Rogers in his Chapter 13 bankruptcy case. It
    * 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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not
    be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH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.
    Case: 18-60822    Document: 00515004481     Page: 2   Date Filed: 06/20/2019
    No. 18-60822
    sought a determination that Rogers’s debt to it was nondischargeable. Rogers
    filed counterclaims for violation of the Truth in Lending Act and state law
    fraud, and the parties filed cross motions for summary judgment on Rogers’s
    counterclaims. Because the claims in the adversary proceeding were non-core
    and Southern Finance did not consent to the bankruptcy court entering a final
    order, the bankruptcy court issued proposed findings of fact and conclusions of
    law. See 
    28 U.S.C. § 157
    (c)(1). The district court adopted the bankruptcy
    court’s findings and conclusions, denying Rogers’s summary judgment motion
    and granting Southern Finance’s.
    Rogers appeals the district court’s order, asserting 
    28 U.S.C. § 1291
     as
    the basis for our jurisdiction.     Southern Finance argues that we lack
    jurisdiction because its claim in the adversary proceeding is pending. We
    agree.    Because the district court’s order disposes only of Rogers’s
    counterclaims and Southern Finance’s claims are still live in the bankruptcy
    court, the district court’s order is not a final decision. See Walters v. Country
    Credit, L.L.C., No. 18-60803, 
    2019 WL 2158833
    , at *1 (5th Cir. May 16, 2019)
    (per curiam) (unpublished) (dismissing appellant-debtor’s appeal of district
    court’s summary judgment order because two of his four claims remained
    pending in bankruptcy court); see also In re Wood & Locker, Inc., 
    868 F.2d 139
    ,
    144 (5th Cir. 1998) (holding that we lack jurisdiction over appeals from a
    bankruptcy court order when the order “adjudicates fewer than all the claims
    . . . in an adversary proceeding”); FED. R. CIV. P. 54(b). We have jurisdiction
    only over final decisions. 
    28 U.S.C. § 1291
    . Thus, we DISMISS Rogers’s appeal
    and REMAND.
    2
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 18-60822

Filed Date: 6/20/2019

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 6/21/2019