United States District Court, C.D. California
IN RE CAROL LAVON PULLIAM, USBC No. 6:14-bk-25027-WJ, Debtor.
ROD DANIELSON, Appellee. CAROL LAVON PULLIAM, Appellant,
ORDER DENYING EMERGENCY APPLICATION TO ADVANCE HEARING DATE ; DENYING MOTION TO SET ASIDE DISMISSAL .
OTIS D. WRIGHT, II, District Judge.
The instant action is an appeal from dismissal by the Bankruptcy Court. On May 28, 2015, following Appellant's failure to comply with the procedures and orders of the Court, this Court dismissed the appeal. Appellant now moves the Court to set aside the May 28 Order denying Appellant's motion for more time to file an opening brief and dismissing the appeal. Appellant also requests, via an Emergency Application, that the Court advance the hearing date on Appellant's Motion. For the reasons discussed below, the Court affirms its dismissal, DENIES Appellant's Emergency Application to Advance Hearing Date, and DENIES Appellant's Motion to Set Aside Dismissal. (ECF Nos. 10, 12.)
II. FACTUAL BACKGROUND
On January 30, 2015,  the United State Bankruptcy Court issued an Order and Notice of Dismissal arising from Carol Pulliam's Chapter 13 confirmation hearing (case number 6:14-bk-25027-WJ). (Am. Notice of Appeal at 3, ECF No. 4.) Pulliam immediately appealed, and elected to proceed before the District Court. (Notice of Appeal, ECF No. 3; Am. Notice of Appeal.)
On February 9, the appeal was assigned to this Court, and the Court issued a Notice Regarding Appeal From Bankruptcy Court. (ECF No. 1.) The Notice informed the parties that they must comply with the applicable rules of the Federal Rules of Bankruptcy Procedure ("Fed. R. Bankr. P."). ( Id. at 1.) It informed the parties that this Court would issue a briefing schedule after the Bankruptcy Court certified that the record was complete. ( Id. at 2.) It further informed the parties that any request for an extension of time in the briefing schedule must be filed "well in advance of the due date, and must specify good cause for the requested extension." ( Id. ) Finally, the Notice advised the parties that "failure of either party to comply with time requirements as stated in this notice and applicable rules may result in the dismissal of the appeal...." ( Id. )
Also on February 9, the Court docketed Appellant Pulliam's Notice of Appeal. (ECF No. 3.) On March 4, the Court docketed Appellant's Amended Notice of Appeal, which attached a copy of the Order of Dismissal issued by the Bankruptcy Court. (ECF No. 4.) On May 12, the Bankruptcy Court certified that the record was ready and this Court issued the Notice Re: Bankruptcy Record Complete, Briefing Schedule, and Notice of Entry. (ECF Nos. 6, 7.) The Briefing Schedule ordered Appellant to submit an opening brief "not later than 5/26/15." (ECF No. 7.) On May 26, Appellant filed a "Motion for More Time to File Opening Brief." (ECF No. 8.) On May 28, the Court issued an Order to Dismiss Appeal ("May 28 Order") denying Appellant's Motion for more time for failure to comply with Fed.R.Bankr.P. 8009-4.5 (C.D. Cal. L. Bankr. R. 4.5) and dismissing the appeal for failure to file an opening brief according to Fed.R.Bankr.P. 8018-4.4 (C.D. Cal. L. Bankr. R. 4.4). (ECF No. 9.)
On June 8, Appellant moved to set aside the dismissal of her appeal (also entitled "Motion for Reconsideration"). (ECF No. 10.) Appellant included a declaration with the Motion in which she stated that she had "searched everywhere" but could not find Local Rule of Bankruptcy Procedure 4.5, and that "[i]t is a mystery what the court did and why." ( Id. at 2.)
Appellee opposed on June 10. (ECF No. 11.) Also on June 10, Appellant filed an Emergency Application to Advance Hearing Date on Motion to Reconsider. (Appl., ECF No. 12.) Appellant's Motion and Application are before the Court for consideration.
A. Emergency Application to Advance Hearing Date
"A motion will be decided without oral argument unless the district court... orders otherwise." Fed.R.Bankr.P. 8013(c). After carefully considering the papers filed in support of and in opposition to Appellant's Motion for Reconsideration, the Court deems the matter appropriate for decision without oral argument. Appellant's Emergency Application to Advance Hearing Date is therefore MOOT.
Additionally, emergency motions must be accompanied by an affidavit containing specified information and an appendix that includes conformed copies of the Notice of Appeal and the Order. C.D. Cal. L. Bankr. R. 5; Fed.R.Bankr.P. 8013(d). Appellant failed to comply with these requirements. Appellant's declaration did not contain the information specified by Fed.R.Bankr.P. 8013(d), and Appellant did not attach the Notice of Appeal or ...