Atkinson v. Ernie Haire Ford, Inc. (In Re Ernie Haire Ford, Inc.)

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• deciding that after Lexmark, the person-aggrieved test does not speak to subject-matter jurisdiction
• noting that a bankruptcy order which allows adversary proceedings to move forward do not cause adversary defendants the type of direct harm necessary to satisfy the person aggrieved standard
• reclassifying the person-aggrieved test as a permissible zone-of-interest test, which asks who can sue under the substantive statute, post-Lexmark
• “Allowing appeals from parties who have suffered only an indirect harm or who hold interests outside the scope of the Bankruptcy Code would defeat the very purpose underlying our person aggrieved standard.”
• “Allowing appeals from parties who have suffered only an indirect harm or who hold interests outside the scope of the Bankruptcy Code would defeat the very purpose underlying our person aggrieved standard.”
• “Assuming arguendo that Atkinson has suffered a direct harm . . . , he is still not a person aggrieved because his interest is not protected or regulated by the 10 Case: 18-12536 Date Filed: 04/08/2020 Page: 11 of 11 Bankruptcy Code.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).