Bankruptcy

Federal Circuit Court’s ‘Enraged’ Judge in Panel Issuing More Frivolous Sanctions in ’22

Burch is again warned that additional frivolous or abusive filings in federal court[s] will result in the imposition of further sanctions.

Burch v. Select Portfolio Servicing

JAN 24, 2022 | REPUBLISHED BY LIT: JAN 24, 2022

WILSON, CORY T.

Judge Cory Todd Wilson

was born August 8, 1970 (Leo)

Age: 50 

OLDHAM, ANDREW “ANDY” S.

ELROD, JENNIFER W.

Judge Jennifer Walker Elrod

was born September 6, 1966 (Virgo)

Age: 54

MOTION DENIED; APPEAL DISMISSED AS FRIVOLOUS; SANCTION IMPOSED; ADDITIONAL SANCTION WARNING ISSUED.

William Paul Burch appeals the district court’s dismissal for failure to pay the filing fee of his appeal of a judgment of the bankruptcy court for the Northern District of Texas. Burch has filed a motion to remand this matter to the district court, stating that he is now able to pay the filing fee.

Because the record does not establish that the district court issued a statement or indicative ruling in accordance with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 62.1 and Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 12.1, upon which Burch relies, Burch’s motion for remand is denied.

See Fed. R. App. P. 12.1; Fed. R. Civ. P. 62.1; cf. Moore v. Tangipahoa Par. Sch. Bd., 836 F.3d 503, 504 (5th Cir. 2016).

The motion for remand concedes that Burch does not currently meet the financial eligibility requirements to proceed IFP in this appeal.

See Fed. R. App. P. 24(a); 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(1); Carson v. Polley, 689 F.2d 562, 586 (5th Cir. 1982);

see also Burch v. Freedom Mortg. Corp. (In re Burch), 835 F. App’x 741, 749 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 142 S. Ct. 253 (2021), rehearing denied,No. 21-5069, 2021 WL 5763451 (U.S. Dec. 6, 2021).

Furthermore, because Burch effectively has not identified any error in the dismissal without prejudice of his bankruptcy appeal for failing to pay the filing fee in the district court, he has not shown a nonfrivolous issue on appeal.

Accordingly, the motion to proceed IFP is denied, and the appeal is dismissed as frivolous.

See 5th Cir. R. 42.2; § 1915(e)(2)(B)(i).

On prior instances, we issued a sanction warning and directed Burch to review his pending appeals and withdraw any that were frivolous. Burch v. Freedom Mortg. Corp. (In re Burch), 850 F. App’x 292, 294 (5th Cir. 2021); Burch, 835 F. App’x at 749.

In a comparable recent appeal, we determined that Burch had not heeded our warnings and filed another frivolous appeal.

Burch v. America’s Servicing Co. (Matter of Burch), No. 20-11074, 2021 WL 5286563, *1 (5th Cir. Nov. 12, 2021) (unpublished).

This court imposed a sanction of $100, again warned of sanctions, and once more admonished Burch to review his pending appeals and to withdraw any frivolous ones. Id.

No. 20-11074

Because Burch has ignored these admonishments, we conclude that an additional sanction is warranted.

Burch is hereby ordered to pay $250.00 to the clerk of this court.

The clerk of this court and the clerks of all courts subject to the jurisdiction of this court are directed to return to Burch unfiled any submissions he should make until the sanction is paid in full.

Burch is again warned that additional frivolous or abusive filings in this court, the district court, or the bankruptcy court will result in the imposition of further sanctions.

Burch is once again admonished to review any pending appeals— particularly those in which he requests leave to proceed IFP from an order dismissing his bankruptcy appeal in the district court for failure to pay the filing fee and moves in this court to remand based on new financial resources—and to withdraw any appeals that are frivolous.

MOTION DENIED; APPEAL DISMISSED AS FRIVOLOUS; SANCTION IMPOSED; ADDITIONAL SANCTION WARNING ISSUED.

Why the Chief Can’t Judge Everything – Even with Judicial Immunity

No [wo]man in this country is so high that [s]he is above the law. No officer of the law may set that law at defiance with impunity.

Fifth Circuit Opinion in Favor of the IRS Leaves Texas Attorney Canada Feelin’ Dry

Fifth Circuit: “Congress chose to omit a damages remedy as to tax penalties assessed and to limit judicial review to post-payment and bankruptcy review,” the opinion said. “This court cannot recognize an implied Bivens claim without violating the separation-of-powers principles that are at the core of the special factors analysis.”

US Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas Stands With the Partisan Conservative Federalist Society in Florida Chapter Meeting

THE JUDICIAL OATH: In sum, the Committee advises that formal affiliation with the American Constitution Society or the Federalist Society, whether as a member or in a leadership role, is inconsistent with Canons 1, 2, 4, and 5 of the Code.

Federal Circuit Court’s ‘Enraged’ Judge in Panel Issuing More Frivolous Sanctions in ’22
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

Laws In Texas is a blog about the Financial Crisis and how the banks and government are colluding against the citizens and homeowners of the State of Texas and relying on a system of #FakeDocs and post-crisis legal precedents, specially created by the Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit to foreclose on homeowners around this great State. We are not lawyers. We do not offer legal advice. We are citizens of the State of Texas who have spent a decade in the court system in Texas and have been party to during this period to the good, the bad and the very ugly.

Donate to LawsInTexas. Make a Difference.

Subscribe to Our Newsletter

We keep your data private and share your data only with third parties that make this service possible. See our Privacy Policy for more information.

© 2020-21 LawInTexas com is an online trading name which is wholly owned by Blogger Inc., a nonprofit 501(c)(3) registered in Delaware. | All Rights Reserved.

To Top