Oliner

Oliner v. Kontrabecki

Good Law
158 F. App'x 1
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitNovember 15, 2005No. 04-15253California832 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

John Kontrabecki appeals the district court’s order, which declared that the bankruptcy court’s imposition of coercive contempt sanctions upon him for violation of its temporary restraining order and pre *2 liminary injunction was not a final order and denied him leave to appeal. We dismiss this appeal for lack of jurisdiction.

(1) To the extent that Kontrabecki has attempted to appeal the district court’s denial of his motion that he be permitted to appeal from an interlocutory order of the bankruptcy court, we lack jurisdiction to consider that denial.

The district court does have the discretion to grant leave to appeal interlocutory bankruptcy court orders. See 28 U.S.C. § 158 (a)(3); Fed. R. Bankr.P. 8001(b). However, when the district court declines to hear an appeal from an interlocutory bankruptcy court order, we have no jurisdiction to review that exercise of its discretion. See Silver Sage Partners, Ltd. v. City of Desert Hot Springs (In re City of Desert Hot Springs), 339 F.3d 782, 787-88 (9th Cir.2003); see also 28 U.S.C. § 158 (d); Lievsay v. W. Fin. Sav. Bank (In re Lievsay), 118 F.3d 661, 662-63 (9th Cir.1997) (per curiam); Briney v. Burley (In re…

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.