Marinkovic
Marinkovic v. Midland Loan Services, Inc.
Opinion
Lead Opinion
MEMORANDUM **
Debtor Milivoj Marinkovic appeals pro se an order of the Bankruptcy Appellate Panel (BAP) dismissing his appeal for failure to prosecute. Mel Marin, debtor’s son, appeals pro se the BAP’s finding that he lacked standing to appeal.
We affirm the BAP’s determination as to Marin’s standing and remand to allow Marinkovic, as the sole appellant, to pursue his appeal.
I.
Marin claims he had standing to challenge two orders of the Bankruptcy Court. The first, filed December 16, 2002, annulled an automatic stay that had been in effect pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 362 (a). The second order, filed February 3, 2003, denied Marin’s motion to extend the time to file a notice of appeal from the Bankruptcy Court’s order of November 26, 2002, which denied reconsideration of an early judgment that annulled another § 362(a) automatic stay. Marin’s sole claim on appeal is that, because he was either a creditor or owner of the property subject to the automatic stays, he is a necessary party to the appeal. Marin’s claim fails.
First, it is not clear that Marin is either a creditor or owner of the subject property. For the purposes of this disposition, however, we assume that he can…