Hipp, Inc., Matter of, 88-1034

Decision Date07 November 1988
Docket NumberNo. 88-1034,88-1034
Citation859 F.2d 374
PartiesIn the Matter of HIPP, INC., Debtor. David OLES, Appellant, v. HIPP, INC., and Thomas J. Griffith, Trustee for Hipp, Inc., Appellees.
CourtU.S. Court of Appeals — Fifth Circuit

Kent Frank Brooks, Dallas, Tex., for appellant.

David Oles, Amarillo, Tex., pro se.

Thomas J. Griffith, Floyd D. Holder, Jr., Lubbock, Tex., for appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas.

Before THORNBERRY, RUBIN, and HIGGINBOTHAM, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

Hipp, Inc., went bankrupt. Among the assets in the Hipp estate was a promissory note. David Oles, the appellant, claims to have an interest in the note. The bankruptcy judge overseeing the Hipp bankruptcy issued an order declaring, among other things, that the note was void ab initio and that David Oles had no interest in the note. 71 B.R. 643. Oles sought to appeal the bankruptcy court's determination to the Federal District Court for the Northern District of Texas. The district court held that Oles lacked standing because he was not a "person aggrieved" by the bankruptcy court's order. See Matter of First Colonial Corp., 544 F.2d 1291, 1296 (5th Cir.1977); In re El San Juan Hotel, 809 F.2d 151, 154 (1st Cir.1987). Oles appeals the dismissal. Because we find that the record as it stands does not support the district court's order, we vacate and remand.

On appeal, the Hipp estate relies entirely upon a single argument to defend the district court's dismissal order: the Hipp estate contends that Oles was not aggrieved by the bankruptcy court's order because Oles is, and was at the time of the order, himself bankrupt. As a result, the Hipp estate argues, Oles could derive no benefit from any finding that he had a right to the note. There is, however, no indication in the record that Oles is or was bankrupt. We need not determine whether or not the district court might appropriately have disposed of the standing issue by taking judicial notice of such a bankruptcy, since the court apparently did not take judicial notice. The parties also agree that there has been an abandonment of the Oles bankruptcy. See 11 U.S.C. Sec. 554. If there has been an abandonment, Oles might again have a means to benefit from favorable disposition of his appeal. Of course, as the Oles bankruptcy is absent from the record, the abandonment is likewise unmentioned.

Nor can the bankruptcy court's determination that Oles has no interest in...

To continue reading

Request your trial
4 cases
  • Dykes, In re, 93-7235
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Third Circuit
    • October 1, 1993
    ...Aviation, Inc., 881 F.2d 939, 940 (10th Cir.1989); Kane v. Johns-Manville Corp., 843 F.2d 636, 641 (2nd Cir.1988); In re Hipp, Inc., 859 F.2d 374, 375 (5th Cir.1988); In re El San Juan Hotel, 809 F.2d 151, 154 (1st Cir.1987); In re Fondiller, 707 F.2d 441 at 442-43 (9th As the Court of Appe......
  • In re Coho Energy Inc.
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Fifth Circuit
    • December 20, 2004
    ...applicable statute has since been repealed, bankruptcy courts still limit appellate standing to those `aggrieved.'"); In re Hipp, Inc., 859 F.2d 374, 375 (5th Cir.1988) (citing a pre-1978 case, In re First Colonial Corp., 544 F.2d 1291, 1296 (5th Cir.1977)); see also In re Westwood Cmty. Tw......
  • Cameron v. Children's Hosp. Medical Center, 96-3379
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Sixth Circuit
    • December 2, 1997
    ...Sligh v. Doe, 596 F.2d 1169, 1170 (4th Cir.1979); (4) whether a party has standing to pursue a claim, see Oles v. Hipp, Inc. (In re Hipp, Inc.), 859 F.2d 374, 375 (5th Cir.1988); or (5) whether venue is proper, see Columbia Pictures Television v. Krypton Broadcasting of Birmingham, Inc., 10......
  • In re American Development Intern. Corp.
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Northern District of Texas
    • October 27, 1995
    ...975 F.2d 413, 416 (7th Cir.1992) (citing In re El San Juan Hotel, 809 F.2d 151, 154 (1st Cir.1987)); see In re Hipp, Inc., 859 F.2d 374, 375 (5th Cir.1988) (per curiam). "This `person aggrieved' requirement is more exacting than the requirements for general Article III standing." Andreuccet......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT