Segal v. O'Connell (In re Segal), 557 B.R. 46

Herman Segal filed (or his counsel filed) a Chapter 7 petition in Sept. 2013; Segal later claimed he had not signed or authorized the petition and moved to dismiss.
The Bankruptcy Court held an evidentiary hearing, found Segal had ratified the petition or was equitably estopped from retracting it, and concluded he acted in bad faith by taking bankruptcy benefits while avoiding debtor obligations.
The Bankruptcy Court denied Segal’s motion to dismiss on March 6, 2015.
Segal (pro se) timely filed a notice of appeal to the district court but missed briefing deadlines; the district court gave extensions and ultimately considered jurisdictional briefing.
The district court declined to dismiss the appeal for failure to file a timely brief and instead resolved whether it had jurisdiction to hear the appeal from the nonfinal order.
The district court dismissed the appeal for lack of jurisdiction, finding the bankruptcy court’s denial of dismissal was interlocutory and denying leave to appeal under § 158(a)(3).

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether denial of motion to dismiss is a final order appealable under 28 U.S.C. § 158(a)(1)	Segal argued the denial was final and appealable.	Trustee argued the denial was interlocutory and not appealable as of right.	Denial was interlocutory and not appealable as of right.
Whether leave to appeal should be granted under § 158(a)(3) (applying § 1292(b) standard)	Segal sought leave to appeal (treated from his notice).	Trustee argued no controlling question of law and no substantial ground for difference of opinion; appeal would be factbound and piecemeal.	Leave denied: issue was factbound, no controlling pure question of law, and no substantial ground for difference of opinion; interlocutory appeal refused.

In re Penn Traffic Co., 466 F.3d 75 (2d Cir.) (explaining flexible but limited finality standard in bankruptcy)
In re Am. Preferred Prescription, Inc., 255 F.3d 87 (2d Cir.) (recognizing flexible finality test in bankruptcy)
LTV Corp. v. Farragher (In re Chateaugay Corp.), 838 F.2d 59 (2d Cir.) (order is final only if it completely resolves the discrete claim)
In re Pegasus Agency, Inc., 101 F.3d 882 (2d Cir.) (interlocutory unless it completely resolves issue)
In re Comm. of Asbestos-Related Litigants, 749 F.2d 3 (2d Cir.) (denial of dismissal for bad faith is interlocutory)
In re Donovan, 532 F.3d 1134 (11th Cir.) (denial of motion to dismiss Chapter 7 is nonfinal)
In re Phillips, 844 F.2d 230 (5th Cir.) (denial of dismissal allows proceedings to continue and is nonfinal)
In re Brown, 916 F.2d 120 (3d Cir.) (contrast — Third Circuit held such denials immediately appealable, expressly creating a circuit split)
In re Flor, 79 F.3d 281 (2d Cir.) (court must examine strength of opposing arguments when assessing substantial ground for difference of opinion)