In Re Vylene Enterprises, Inc., Debtor. Vylene Enterprises, Inc. v. Naugles, Inc.

968 F.2d 887 27 Collier Bankr.Cas.2d 771 , 23 Bankr.Ct.Dec. 236 , Bankr. L. Rep. P 74,737 In re VYLENE ENTERPRISES, INC., Debtor. VYLENE ENTERPRISES, INC., Plaintiff-Appellant, v. NAUGLES, INC., Defendant-Appellee. No. 91-55087. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Argued and Submitted Feb. 4, 1992. Decided June 29, 1992. Phillip K. Fife, Seal Beach, Cal., for plaintiff-appellant. William T. Rintala and Suzanne Criley, Rintala, Smoot, Jaenicke & Brunswick, Los Angeles, Cal., for defendant-appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of California. Before: ALARCON, BEEZER and RYMER, Circuit Judges. BEEZER, Circuit Judge: 1 We consider court of appeals jurisdiction over an adversary proceeding that began in the bankruptcy court and was appealed to the district court. The district court vacated the bankruptcy court's final judgment in favor of Vylene Enterprises, Inc. (Vylene) and remanded to the bankruptcy court for submission of proposed findings of fact and conclusions of law. Because the district court's order is not final, we dismiss Vylene's appeal for lack of jurisdiction.I FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY 2 Naugles, Inc. (Naugles)…

We consider court of appeals jurisdiction over an adversary proceeding that began in the bankruptcy court and was appealed to the district court. The district court vacated the bankruptcy court’s final judgment in favor of Vylene Enterprises, Inc. (Vylene) and remanded to the bankruptcy court for submission of proposed findings of fact and conclusions of law. Because the district court’s order is not final, we dismiss Vyl-ene’s appeal for lack of jurisdiction.

*889 I

FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY

Naugles, Inc. (Naugles) franchised one of its Mexican fast food restaurants to Vylene. The parties’ dispute centers on whether Naugles breached its duty to negotiate in good faith with Vylene for an extension of the franchise agreement.

Vylene’s adversary filing in bankruptcy has produced a number of published dispositions.

Vylene filed the pending action in the bankruptcy court when it was the debtor in possession in Chapter 11 proceedings. Naugles consistently objected to the bankruptcy court’s assertion of core jurisdiction over the case. 2 Pursuant to its claimed core jurisdiction, the bankruptcy court rendered a final money judgment in Vylene’s favor. Vylene Enters. v. Naugles,…

concurring:

I concur in the judgment.