Taumoepeau v. Manufacturers & Traders Trust Co. (In Re Taumoepeau)

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that a six-page order and judgment “reflecting a detailed recitation of the facts [and] legal reasoning” was not a separate document
• “[W]e do not in any way suggest that the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure apply wholesale to proceedings before the BAP.”
• jurisdictional timeliness requirement under § 2107 and Appellate Rule 4(a)(1) is applicable to bankruptcy appeals to circuit courts by virtue of Appellate Rule 6(b)(1) and Advisory Committee notes to Bankruptcy Rule 8001
• “[T]he separate document rule is a technical one. But, as its name implies, it generally requires that judgment be entered in a separate document, one that is ‘not made part of the opinion and order’ of the court.”
• describing what constitutes a final order

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).