In Re: Aurora Commercial Corp.
- John Koeltl
- 1:19-cv-11207
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 24
In Gerard Pierre v. Aurora Commercial Corp., Judge Koeltl ordered that the appellant need not file another copy of his already-served brief.
Gerard Pierre, the appellant, and Aurora Commercial Corp., the appellee; the order concerns filing a copy of Pierre’s brief in the appeal.
What happened
Gerard Pierre v. Aurora Commercial Corp. is an appeal in which the appellee submitted a complete copy of Pierre’s served brief for the court’s record.
The attached brief says Pierre was appealing a bankruptcy court order that disallowed and expunged his claim, and it asks the district court to reverse that order. Those arguments appear in the brief, not in the district court’s ruling.
Judge Koeltl ruled only that the attached copy was sufficient and that Pierre did not need to file another copy. This order did not decide the appeal’s underlying issues.
The detailed version
- In Re: Aurora Commercial Corp. · No. 1:19-cv-11207
- John Koeltl
- May 13, 2020
Background
This matter is an appeal from an order of the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New York. The opinion text consists of a short filing-related order followed by an attached opening brief submitted by Gerard M. Pierre, who identified himself as representing himself. The brief says Pierre appealed the bankruptcy court’s order sustaining the debtors’ objection to Proof of Claim No. 26 and disallowing and expunging that claim.
The attached brief argues that the bankruptcy court incorrectly treated Pierre’s claim as barred by statutes of limitations and delay-based defenses. It also argues that Aurora Loan Services, LLC violated the automatic stay in Pierre’s earlier bankruptcy case and that his due-process rights were violated. These are arguments made by Pierre in the attached brief; the order does not decide whether they are correct.
Ruling
Aurora Commercial Corp., the appellee, submitted a complete copy of Pierre’s served brief. Judge John G. Koeltl ordered that the copy be attached to the record and that Pierre did not need to file another copy. The order does not state a decision on the merits of the appeal or resolve Pierre’s underlying claim.
Effect of the Order
The order addresses only whether another copy of the already-served brief had to be filed. It does not affirm, reverse, dismiss, or otherwise decide the bankruptcy court’s order in the text provided.
Read the full 24-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.