Skip to main content
Find a Lawyer

BROUGHTON v. 2006 41CB 2006 41CB (2019)

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

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.

No. 18-2427, No. 19-1014

Decided: July 05, 2019

Before WYNN and DIAZ, Circuit Judges, and SHEDD, Senior Circuit Judge.

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.

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, 69 S.Ct. 1221, 93 L.Ed. 1528 (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

PER CURIAM:

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Was this helpful?

Welcome to FindLaw's Cases & Codes

A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.

Go to Learn About the Law

BROUGHTON v. 2006 41CB 2006 41CB (2019)

Docket No: No. 18-2427, No. 19-1014

Decided: July 05, 2019

Court: United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Need to find an attorney?

Search our directory by legal issue

Enter information in one or both fields (Required)

    More Options

    For Legal Professionals

    Get a profile on the #1 online legal directory

    Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.

    Sign up

    Learn About the Law

    Get help with your legal needs

    FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.

    Go to Learn About the Law

    Need to find an attorney?

    Search our directory by legal issue

    Enter information in one or both fields (Required)

      More Options
      Copied to clipboard