Speers

Speers v. Roman Catholic Church of Diocese of Tucson (In re Roman Catholic Church of Diocese of Tucson)

Good Law
329 F. App'x 130·329 Fed. Appx. 130·2009 WL 2010899·2009 U.S. App. LEXIS 16227
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJuly 7, 2009No. 08-15526California248 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Phillip Gregory Speers appeals pro se from the district court’s order affirming the bankruptcy court’s order denying his motion for relief from the order dismissing his amended complaint and disallowing his proof of claim. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review de novo the district court’s decision, Neilson v. United States (In re Olshan), 356 F.3d 1078, 1083 (9th Cir.2004), and we affirm.

The district court properly concluded that the bankruptcy court did not abuse its discretion by denying as untimely Speers’s motion under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b) because the time to appeal had expired, and Speers knew of the bankruptcy court’s order and the primary grounds for his motion the day after the order was filed. See Fed. R. Bankr.P. 9024 (applying Rule 60 to bankruptcy proceedings with limited exceptions); Ashford v. Steuart, 657 F.2d 1053, 1055 (9th Cir.1981) (per curiam) (explaining that “the interest in finality must be given great weight” when the time to appeal has expired, and concluding that the district court did not abuse its discretion by denying a Rule 60(b) motion as untimely where the motion was filed after the time to appeal…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.