Opinion
No. 18-2427 No. 19-1014
07-05-2019
CELESTE G. BROUGHTON, a/k/a Celeste Gold Broughton, Debtor - Appellant, v. BANKRUPTCY ADMINISTRATOR, Party-in-Interest - Appellee, BANK OF NEW YORK MELLON, f/k/a The Bank of New York, as Trustee, on behalf of the holders of the Alternative Loan Trust 2006-41CB, Morgan Pass Through Certificates Series 2006-41CB; BANK OF AMERICA, N.A.; CITIBANK, N.A.; WAKE COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, Creditors - Appellees, ESTATE OF ROBERT BROUGHTON. Appellee, WALTER L. HINSON, Trustee - Appellee. CELESTE G. BROUGHTON, a/k/a Celeste Gold Broughton, Debtor - Appellant, v. BANKRUPTCY ADMINISTRATOR, Party-in-Interest - Appellee, BANK OF NEW YORK MELLON, f/k/a The Bank of New York, as Trustee, on behalf of the holders of the Alternative Loan Trust 2006-41CB, Morgan Pass Through Certificates Series 2006-41CB; BANK OF AMERICA, N.A.; CITIBANK, N.A.; WAKE COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, Creditors - Appellees, ESTATE OF ROBERT BROUGHTON, Appellee, WALTER L. HINSON, Trustee - Appellee.
Celeste G. Broughton, Appellant Pro Se. Brian Charles Behr, OFFICE OF THE BANKRUPTCY ADMINISTRATOR, Raleigh, North Carolina; Walter Lee Hinson, Jr., WALTER L. HINSON, P.A., Wilson, North Carolina, for Appellees.
UNPUBLISHED
Appeals from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Martin K. Reidinger, District Judge. (5:16-cv-00302-S; 5:16-cv-00302-RE) Before WYNN and DIAZ, Circuit Judges, and SHEDD, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Celeste G. Broughton, Appellant Pro Se. Brian Charles Behr, OFFICE OF THE BANKRUPTCY ADMINISTRATOR, Raleigh, North Carolina; Walter Lee Hinson, Jr., WALTER L. HINSON, P.A., Wilson, North Carolina, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM:
Celeste G. Broughton seeks to appeal the district court's orders denying her motions to reconsider several of the court's previous orders in Broughton's ongoing bankruptcy proceeding, denying Broughton's motion to certify other orders for immediate appeal, and ordering Broughton to show cause why she should not be sanctioned for failing to comply with a prior court order. This court may exercise jurisdiction only over final orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1291 (2012), and certain interlocutory and collateral orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1292 (2012); Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(b); Cohen v. Beneficial Indus. Loan Corp., 337 U.S. 541, 545-46 (1949). The orders Broughton seeks to appeal are neither final orders nor appealable interlocutory or collateral orders. Accordingly, we dismiss the appeals for lack of jurisdiction and deny Broughton's motion for restraining orders. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
DISMISSED