Johnny Harris v. The Boyd G. Montgomery Testame , 277 F. App'x 645 ( 2008 )


Menu:
  •                          United States Court of Appeals
    FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT
    ___________
    No. 07-1977
    ___________
    In re: Johnny F. Harris,               *
    *
    Debtor,                 *
    -----------------                      *
    Johnny F. Harris,                      *
    *
    Appellant,                *
    *
    v.                               *   Appeal from the United States
    *   Bankruptcy Appellate Panel
    The Boyd G. Montgomery                 *   for the Eighth Circuit.
    Testamentary Trust; The Law Firm of    *
    Chisenhall, Nestrud & Julian; Mark     *   [UNPUBLISHED]
    W. Hodge,                              *
    *
    Appellees,              *
    -----------------                      *
    In re: Johnn F. Harris,                *
    *
    Debtor,                 *
    -----------------                      *
    Johnny F. Harris,                      *
    *
    Appellant,                *
    *
    v.                               *
    *
    The Boyd G. Montgomery                 *
    Testamentary Trust,                    *
    *
    Appellee.                 *
    ___________
    Submitted: May 7, 2008
    Filed: May 12, 2008
    ___________
    Before BYE, SMITH, and BENTON, Circuit Judges.
    ___________
    PER CURIAM.
    Johnny Harris appeals the Bankruptcy Appellate Panel’s (BAP’s) decision to
    dismiss, for failure to prosecute, his appeals from two bankruptcy court1 orders. The
    BAP did not abuse its discretion. The BAP granted Harris two extensions of time to
    file his brief, and gave him notice that no further extensions would be granted, yet he
    still did not file his brief by the second extended date. See In re Beachport Entm’t,
    
    396 F.3d 1083
    , 1086-87 (9th Cir. 2005) (BAP’s imposition of sanctions, including
    summary dismissal for non-compliance with procedural requirement, is reviewed for
    abuse of discretion and court does not reach merits of bankruptcy court’s ruling); see
    also In re Tampa Chain Co., Inc., 
    835 F.2d 54
    , 55 (2d Cir. 1987) (per curiam) (district
    court’s decision dismissing bankruptcy appeal for failure to timely file brief will be
    affirmed unless court has abused discretion); cf. Soliman v. Johanns, 
    412 F.3d 920
    ,
    921-22 (8th Cir. 2005) (although pro se litigant suffered extreme family hardship,
    court did not abuse its discretion in denying request for extension to file response;
    court merely enforced deadline and even pro se litigants must comply with court rules
    and directives).
    Accordingly, we affirm. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.
    ______________________________
    1
    The Honorable Audrey R. Evans, Chief Judge, United States Bankruptcy Court
    for the Eastern District of Arkansas.
    -2-