FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
LEONARD ROWICKI, No. 1-86-01438
WILLIAM GROVER, Trustee,
v. A.P. No. 1-86-0221
ORDER DENYING MOTION TO ALLOW LATE NOTICE OF APPEAL
Defendant missed the 10-day appeal period of Bankruptcy Rule 8002(a), but now wishes to appeal the
judgment entered against her in these proceedings. She seeks an extension of time pursuant to Rule
8002(c), pleading excusable neglect. The declaration of her attorney states that he missed the appeal
deadline because of the "time required to communicate" with his client and because of his "understanding"
from a bankruptcy treatise that the appeal period was thirty days. For the reasons set forth below, the
motion is denied.
A strict standard of excusable neglect is to be applied in proceedings pursuant to Rule 8002(c). Matter
of Butler's Tire and Battery Co, Inc.
(9th Cir.1979) 592 F.2d 1028; In re Zeller
(9th Cir.BAP 1984) 38
B.R. 739. The moving party must show that a timely notice of appeal was not filed due to circumstances
beyond his control, such as failure to learn of the entry of the judgment. 6 Bkr.L.Ed., para. 58:19; Re
Tinnell Traffic Services, Inc.
(Bkrtcy.M.D.Tenn.1984) 43 B.R. 280. Difficulty in communicating with a
client has been specifically held not to constitute excusable neglect. In re International Coating Applicators,
(10th Cir.1981) 647 F.2d 121; In re Smith
(Bkrtcy.N.D.Ohio 1982) 38 B.R. 685. Ignorance of the
law by counsel likewise does not constitute excusable neglect. Matter of Butler's Tire and Battery Co.,
supra, 592 F.2d at 1034. This is especially so when the learned treatise blamed by counsel does in fact
recite the law correctly. 3 Cowan's Bankruptcy Law and Practice
Defendant's motion for an extension of time to appeal, made after the time to appeal has expired, is
Dated: October 18, 1987 __________________________