Trial Transcript, May 29, 2007, 18:3-21.
28 U.S.C. §158(a);
In re Moody
, 817 F.2d 365, 366 (5
Matter of U.S. Abatement Corp.
, 39 F.3d 563, 566 (5
In re Morrell
, 880 F.2d 855, 856-57 (5
F.3d at567.3In response to the Motion for Sanctions, as well as in its memorandum on the severed issues,Wells Fargo avers that the Notice of Appeal deprives this Court of subject matter jurisdiction over any determination as to the amount of damages or sanctions available.
The Bankruptcy Code requires the entry of a final judgment before an appeal may be lodgedunless the district court grants leave to appeal an interlocutory order.
In re Morrell
, 880 F.2d 855(5
Cir. 1989), the Fifth Circuit held that a civil contempt order is not “final” for purposes of appealunless two actions occur: (1) a finding of contempt is issued, and (2) an appropriate sanction isimposed.
Determinations of liability without an assessment of damages are as likely to causeduplicative litigation in bankruptcy as they are in civil litigation, and because bankruptcy litigants may appeal to district as well as to appellate courts, the wasteof judicial resources is likely to be greater. The rule for appeals from bankruptcydecisions determining liability but not damages under 28 U.S.C. §158(d) must...bethe same as the rule under [28 U.S.C.] §1291.
, at 856-57.The holding was further solidified by
In the Matter of United States Abatement Corporation,
39 F.3d 563 (5
Cir. 1994). The facts of
are almost directly on point.
involved a claim against a creditor for a stay violation. After finding that the creditor’s conductviolated the automatic stay, the Court ordered the debtor to file an itemization of damages, butconditioned further hearing on request of any party. The creditor filed a motion for reconsideration,followed by a notice of appeal. Thereafter, the Court granted the creditor’s motion for
Case 06-01093 Doc 153 Filed 08/29/07 Entered 08/29/07 14:54:42 Main DocumentPage 3 of 16