Mitchell Kalmanson v. Linda Nofziger , 227 F. App'x 788 ( 2007 )

[DO NOT PUBLISH]
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FILED
FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
________________________ ELEVENTH CIRCUIT
APR 9, 2007
No. 06-13418 THOMAS K. KAHN
Non-Argument Calendar CLERK
________________________
D. C. Docket No. 05-01474-CV-ORL-31-DAB
BKCY No. 04-09253-BKC-KSJ
In Re: LINDA NOFZIGER,
Debtor.
_________________________________________________
MITCHELL KALMANSON,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
versus
LINDA NOFZIGER,
Defendant-Appellee.
________________________
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Middle District of Florida
_________________________
(April 9, 2007)
Before BARKETT, WILSON and PRYOR, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:
Mitchell Kalmanson, a creditor proceeding pro se, appeals the district
court’s order affirming the bankruptcy court’s order denying (1) rehearing of its
order denying Kalmanson’s motion to aside an order sealing certain proceedings
and documents which had been sealed to protect the safety of Nofziger, the
debtor 1; (2) his motion for relief from the automatic stay of the lawsuit he had filed
in state court against Nofziger; and (3) his motion to dismiss Nofziger’s Chapter 13
bankruptcy case. Kalmanson also appeals the district court’s denial of his motion
for reconsideration of that affirmance. We previously dismissed for lack of
jurisdiction Kalmanson’s challenge to the orders relating to Kalmanson’s motion to
dismiss.
First, we find no error in the denial of Kalmanson’s motion for relief from
the stay. Balancing the prejudice to the parties involved, the court found that both
it and the state court could efficiently resolve Kalmanson’s claims, and had the
power to do so and that Kalmanson had waived any right to a jury trial by filing a
proof of claim in the bankruptcy case. The court appropriately considered all
factors as well as the possible prejudice to Kalmanson and we find no error either
1
After the filing of Nofziger’s bankruptcy case, the bankruptcy trustee conducted an 11
U.S.C. § 341 Meeting of Creditors. Nofziger then filed a motion under seal requesting that the
bankruptcy court seal the tape and transcript of the § 341 hearing. In that motion, Nofziger
asserted that she was a federally protected witness and she received a new identity and an
alternate social security number within the past six years.
2
in its weighing process or in its conclusion. The grounds articulated by the
bankruptcy court for declining to lift the stay were reasonable and supported by the
record, and, therefore its refusal to lift the stay was not an abuse of discretion.
Second, we have no jurisdiction to consider the district court’s order
affirming the bankruptcy court’s order denying rehearing of its denial of
Kalmanson’s motion to set aside the order sealing certain parts of the proceedings
or the denial of Kalmanson’s motion for reconsideration of that affirmance.
AFFIRMED IN PART, DISMISSED IN PART.
3