In re Bestwall LLC (W.D.N.C., Nov. 10, 2021)

Our plain-English summary of In re Bestwall LLC (U.S. District Court, Western District of North Carolina, November 10, 2021).

Bestwall LLC is a debtor in a bankruptcy case in North Carolina that involves asbestos claims. Bestwall asked the bankruptcy court for an order requiring claimants with pending mesothelioma cases against it to fill out personal injury questionnaires. The bankruptcy court granted that request in March 2021. The Official Committee of Asbestos Claimants appealed, and the Future Claimants' Representative filed a notice of appeal and joined the Committee's motion for leave to appeal. In earlier orders in a separate case number, the district court had ruled that the questionnaire order was not a final order and refused leave to appeal an interlocutory order. In this order, the district court found that the Representative raised the same jurisdictional issues and incorporated its earlier reasoning. It denied the joinder motion for leave to appeal and dismissed the appeal. It did not decide whether the bankruptcy court's questionnaire order was correct. The opinion does not name any individual claimant, disease history, or exposure.

We wrote this summary from the court's opinion with the help of AI. It is not the court's wording, and it is not legal advice. The full opinion is below.

The decision

• Court: U.S. District Court, Western District of North Carolina
• Decided: November 10, 2021
• Docket: No. 3:21-cv-179-RJC
• Stage: Appeal from bankruptcy
• State: North Carolina

Outcome. The district court denied the Future Claimants' Representative's request for leave to appeal the Bankruptcy Court's PIQ Order and dismissed the appeal, ruling the order was not final; Bestwall LLC prevailed.

What the court held. A bankruptcy court order granting a Rule 2004 motion for personal injury questionnaires is not a final order under 28 U.S.C. § 158(a)(1), and the district court declined to grant leave to appeal it as an interlocutory order under § 158(a)(3).

Issues decided: Asbestos Bankruptcies, Trial Procedure and Discovery.

The defendants

• Bestwall LLC

The court's opinion

The text below is Google Scholar's copy of the court's opinion, a public record. Numbers in brackets, such as [*921], mark where each page of the printed reporter begins.

IN RE BESTWALL LLC, Debtor.

FUTURE CLAIMANTS' REPRESENTATIVE, Appellant,

v.

BESTWALL LLC, Appellee.

No. 3:21-cv-179-RJC.

November 10, 2021.

United States District Court, W.D. North Carolina, Charlotte Division.

ORDER

ROBERT J. CONRAD, JR., District Judge.

THIS MATTER comes before the Court on the Notice of Appeal (Doc. No. 1) and Joinder to the Motion of the Official Committee of Asbestos Claimants of Bestwall LLC for Leave to Appeal the PIQ Order (Doc. No. 2). This Court has reviewed the Motion and applicable law. For the reasons stated herein and as fully set forth in this Court's Orders in case number 3:21-cv-151 entered May 10, 2021 and November 2, 2021 (Case No. 3:21-cv-151, Doc. Nos. 11 & 15) Appellant's Joinder to the Motion of the Official Committee of Asbestos Claimants of Bestwall LLC for Leave to Appeal the PIQ Order (Doc. 2) is DENIED. The Appellant's appeal of the Bankruptcy Court's PIQ Order (Bankr. Case No. 17-31795, Bankr. Doc. No. 1670) is DISMISSED.

I. BACKGROUND

On July 30, 2020, the Appellee filed in its bankruptcy case a Motion for Order Pursuant to Bankruptcy Rule 2004 Directing Submission of Personal Injury Questionnaires by Pending Mesothelioma Claimants, which it sought to serve on the asbestos claimants with cases pending against the Appellee (the "PIQ Motion"). (Bankr. Doc. No. 1236). The Official Committee of Asbestos Claimants (the "Committee") and others objected to the PIQ Motion. (Bankr. Doc. No. 1326). The Bankruptcy Court granted the PIQ Motion on March 23, 2021 ("PIQ Order"). (Bankr. Doc. No. 1670).

On April 7, 2021, the Committee filed a Notice of Appeal and a Motion for Leave to Appeal the PIQ Order (the "Committee's Motion for Leave"), asserting the Bankruptcy Court erred by granting the PIQ Motion. (Case No. 3:21-cv-151, Doc. Nos. 1 & 2). Soon after, on April 21, 2021, Appellant filed a Notice of Appeal (Doc. No. 1) and Joinder to the Motion of the Official Committee of Asbestos Claimants of Bestwall LLC for Leave to Appeal the PIQ Order (the "Joinder Motion for Leave"). (Doc. No. 2). The Joinder Motion for Leave requests the Court grant leave to appeal the PIQ Order for certain questions set forth in the Committee's Motion for Leave. Id.

Thereafter, in case number 3:21-cv-151, on May 10, 2021, this Court denied the Committee's Motion for Leave (1) concluding the Bankruptcy Court's PIQ Order is not a final appealable order, and (2) denying the Committee's request for leave to appeal the PIQ Order under 28 U.S.C. § 158(a)(3) (the "May 10 Order"). (Case No. 3:21-cv-151, Doc. No. 11). On Motion for Rehearing, the Court reconsidered the May 10 Order and denied the Motion for Rehearing insofar as it requested the Court reconsider whether it would exercise jurisdiction over the appeal, but clarified that it did not consider the merits of the appeal, does not affirm the Bankruptcy Court's PIQ Order, and dismissed the appeal (the "Rehearing Order"). (Case No. 3:21-cv-151, Doc. No. 15).

II. DISCUSSION

This Court has jurisdiction over "final judgments, orders, and decrees. . . and with leave of court, from interlocutory orders and decrees, of bankruptcy judges. . . ." 28 U.S.C. § 158(a). Courts take a pragmatic view of finality in the bankruptcy context, such that "orders in bankruptcy cases may be immediately appealed if they finally dispose of discrete disputes within the larger case." In re Computer Learning Centers, Inc., 407 F.3d 656, 660 (4th Cir.2005) (citation omitted). When

considering an appeal from the bankruptcy court, the district court must accept the bankruptcy court's findings of fact unless they are clearly erroneous. In re Johnson, 960 F.2d 396, 399 (4th Cir. 1992). District courts review de novo a bankruptcy court's conclusions of law. Id.

The Notice of Appeal and Joinder Motion for Leave present the same jurisdictional issues and arguments the Court previously considered in the Committee's Motion for Leave. The Court fully considered and decided such issues and arguments in the Committee's appeal of the PIQ Order by its May 10 Order and the Rehearing Order. (Case number 3:21-cv-151, Doc. Nos. 11 & 15). For the reasons fully explained by this Court in the May 10 Order as modified by the Rehearing Order, both Orders incorporated herein, the Court concludes the PIQ Order is not a final order for the purposes of 28 U.S.C. § 158(a)(1) and its denies Appellant's request for leave to appeal the PIQ Order under 28 U.S.C. § 158(a)(3). The Court will not exercise jurisdiction to consider the merits of the appeal of the PIQ Order.

III. CONCLUSION

IT IS, THEREFORE, ORDERED that:

1. The Appellant's Joinder to the Motion of the Official Committee of Asbestos Claimants of Bestwall LLC for Leave to Appeal the PIQ Order (Doc. No. 2) is DENIED;

2. The Appellant's appeal of the Bankruptcy Court's PIQ Order (Bankr. Doc. No. 1670) is DISMISSED. The Clerk of Court is directed to close this matter and advise the Bankruptcy Court in writing of the dismissal of this appeal.

Sources

• The opinion on Google Scholar
• North Carolina asbestos laws
• North Carolina asbestos exposure sites