United States v. Lamont D. Hill , 23 F. App'x 621 ( 2001 )


Menu:
  •                    United States Court of Appeals
    FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT
    ___________
    Nos. 01-1526/2434
    ___________
    United States of America,               *
    *
    Appellee,                  *
    *
    v.                                *
    *
    Lamont D. Hill,                         * Appeal from the United States
    * District Court for the
    Appellant,                 * District of South Dakota.
    *
    Janet Thompson; Shield Partnership;     *
    Ross Hill; Jody Hill; Kenneth           * [UNPUBLISHED]
    Falkenhagen; Asmussen Grain, Inc.;      *
    Robert Joachim, doing business as       *
    Joachim Brothers Partnership; Pioneer *
    Hi-Breed International, Inc.; Barber    *
    Farm Service; Keltgen Seed Company; *
    Aberdeen Association of Orthopedic      *
    Surgeons; Sully County, a political     *
    subdivision of the State of South       *
    Dakota,                                 *
    *
    Defendants.                *
    ___________
    Submitted: November 29, 2001
    Filed: December 14, 2001
    ___________
    Before BOWMAN, BRIGHT, and LOKEN, Circuit Judges.
    ___________
    PER CURIAM.
    In these consolidated appeals, Lamont Hill challenges orders of the district
    court1 which confirmed a foreclosure sale (No. 01-1526), and denied relief under
    Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b), denied his recusal motion, and imposed
    sanctions under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 11 (No. 01-2434).
    We dismiss appeal No. 01-1526 as moot. See United States v. Fitzgerald, 
    109 F.3d 1339
    , 1342 (8th Cir. 1997) (once foreclosed property is sold to third-party
    purchaser, court generally lacks power to craft remedy for debtor; therefore, debtor
    who fails to obtain stay of sale has no remedy on appeal and appeal is moot).
    As to appeal No. 01-2434, we conclude after careful review of the record that
    the district court's rulings were within its discretion. See Brooks v. Ferguson-
    Florissant Sch. Dist., 
    113 F.3d 903
    , 905 (8th Cir. 1997) (Rule 60(b) standard of
    review); Isakson v. First Nat'l Bank, Sioux Falls, 
    985 F.2d 984
    , 986 (8th Cir. 1993)
    (per curiam)(Rule 11 standard of review); United States v. Faul, 
    748 F.2d 1204
    , 1211
    (8th Cir. 1984)(recusal standard of review), cert. denied, 
    472 U.S. 1027
     (1985).
    Accordingly, we affirm. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.
    A true copy.
    Attest:
    CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
    1
    The Honorable Charles B. Kornmann, United States District Judge for the
    District of South Dakota.
    -2-
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 01-1526, 01-2434

Citation Numbers: 23 F. App'x 621

Judges: Bowman, Bright, Loken, Per Curiam

Filed Date: 12/14/2001

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 11/5/2024