Antelope Technologies Inc. v. Lowe , 326 F. App'x 304 ( 2009 )


Menu:
  •             IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT  United States Court of Appeals
    Fifth Circuit
    FILED
    June 2, 2009
    No. 08-20593                        Charles R. Fulbruge III
    Clerk
    In The Matter Of: ANTELOPE TECHNOLOGIES INC, doing business as
    MCC Computer Company
    Debtor
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    ANTELOPE TECHNOLOGIES INC., doing business as MCC Computer
    Company
    Appellant
    v.
    JANIS LOWE; ALAN TAYLOR
    Appellees
    Appeal from the United States District Court
    Southern District of Texas
    USDC Nos. 4:07-CV-4135 and 4:08-CV-0127(Consolidated)
    Before JONES, Chief Judge, and HIGGINBOTHAM and HAYNES, Circuit
    Judges.
    PER CURIAM:*
    *
    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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not
    be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR .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.
    No. 08-20593
    Antelope Technologies, a debtor, appeals a district court order vacating
    its confirmed chapter 11 bankruptcy plan and remanding for fact-finding on
    whether the plan was proposed in good faith and for a hearing on whether to
    appoint a trustee. This court must examine its own appellate jurisdiction sua
    sponte.   Lane v. Halliburton, 
    529 F.3d 548
    , 565 (5th Cir. 2008).        We have
    appellate jurisdiction over all final orders, 28 U.S.C. § 158(d)(1), but a district
    court order remanding to the bankruptcy court is not final if the bankruptcy
    court on remand must perform judicial, rather than merely ministerial,
    functions. Beal Bank, S.S.B. v. Caddo Parish-Villas South, Ltd., 
    174 F.3d 624
    ,
    626 (5th Cir. 1999). Here, the bankruptcy court must admit evidence, weigh
    that evidence, and then decide whether to appoint a trustee and whether the
    plan was proposed in good faith—more than a ministerial function. See County
    Mgmt., Inc. v. Kriegel, 
    788 F.2d 311
    , 313 (5th Cir. 1986) (“This remand for
    further factual findings simply is not a final order.”)      Antelope’s appeal is
    therefore DISMISSED.
    2
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 08-20593

Citation Numbers: 326 F. App'x 304

Judges: Haynes, Higginbotham, Jones, Per Curiam

Filed Date: 6/2/2009

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 8/2/2023