Robert Paul Sharpe v. Algernon Butler, et al.

United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, Southern Division · December 2, 2025 · No. 7:24-CV-00456-M

Summary

The United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina dismissed Robert Paul Sharpe’s bankruptcy appeal for failure to file the designation of appellate record and statement of issues required by Federal Rule of Bankruptcy Procedure 8009. On remand from the Fourth Circuit, the court reconsidered all four Serra Builders factors and found negligence, adequate notice and opportunity to explain, prejudice to appellees, and no adequate lesser sanction. The court denied the remaining motions as moot and directed the clerk to close the case.

Court
United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, Southern Division
Jurisdiction
United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, Southern Division
Decision date
December 2, 2025
Docket number
7:24-CV-00456-M
Procedural posture
On remand from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, the district court reconsidered its dismissal of Sharpe's bankruptcy appeal for failure to comply with Federal Rule of Bankruptcy Procedure 8009 and again dismissed the appeal.
Standard of review
The district court treated dismissal for noncompliance with the bankruptcy appellate rules as a discretionary sanction and applied the Serra factors.
Precedential value
Unknown
Parties
Robert Paul Sharpe v. Algernon Butler, et al.
Disposition
dismissed

Topics

appellate procedurebankruptcysanctionscivil procedure

Practice areas

BankruptcyFederal appellate procedureCivil procedure

Questions Presented

  1. Whether the district court should dismiss a bankruptcy appeal when the appellant fails to file the designation of appellate-record items and statement of issues required by Federal Rule of Bankruptcy Procedure 8009.
  2. Whether, after remand from the Fourth Circuit, the Serra factors supported dismissal based on negligence, notice and opportunity to explain, prejudice to appellees, and the absence of lesser sanctions.

Holdings

  1. A district court has discretion to impose sanctions, including dismissal, when a bankruptcy appellant fails to comply with the procedural requirements of the bankruptcy rules.
  2. Dismissal was appropriate because Sharpe negligently failed to file the required designation and statement of issues, received notice and an opportunity to explain, caused prejudice to appellees, and had no effective lesser sanction available.

Key quotations

Any fair reading of Serra reveals that a proper application of its test will normally require a district court to consider and balance all relevant factors. (Legal Standards)
Appellant’s notice of appeal, DE 1, is DISMISSED. (Conclusion)

Factual background

Sharpe filed a notice of appeal from the bankruptcy court's May 30, 2024, order approving and authorizing a compromise of controversy. Despite requesting and receiving an extension, he did not file a designation of the items to be included in the appellate record or a statement of the issues presented. After receiving an order to show cause, he asserted that the required information appeared in other filings and emails, but the district court found that he had never made the required filing and that appellees incurred expense and prejudice in proceeding without knowing the issues on appeal.

Procedural history

Sharpe appealed a bankruptcy court order approving a compromise of controversy. He failed to file the required designation of the appellate record and statement of issues despite receiving an extension. The district court initially dismissed the appeal under In re Serra Builders, Inc.; the Fourth Circuit remanded because the district court had not addressed possible prejudice and lesser sanctions. On remand, the district court reconsidered all four Serra factors and dismissed the appeal.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…