The Divestiture Rule Explained: A Judge-Made Doctrine Doesn't Necessarily Deprive a Lower Court of Ongoing Subject Matter Jurisdiction
The filing of an appeal in federal court generally divests the lower court of jurisdiction. This rule of appellate jurisdiction applies both to appeals from a district court to a court of appeals and from a bankruptcy court to a district court. “A notice of appeal is an event of jurisdictional significance — it confers jurisdiction on the court of appeals and divests the district court of its control over those aspects of the case involved in the appeal.” Griggs v. Provident Consumer Discount Co., 459 U.S. 56, 58 (1982). Significantly, however, divestiture of jurisdiction is a judge-made rule, not one created by statute. As a result, the court overseeing Acute Inc. v. ECI Pharmaceuticals LLC (“ECI Pharmaceuticals”) observed recently that the “divestiture rule is not truly jurisdictional.” Adv. Pro. No. 25-01048-SMG, 2025 Bankr. LEXIS 1232, *3 (Bankr. S.D. Fla. May 21, 2025).
To continue reading Daniel A. Lowenthal's article in The Bankruptcy Strategist, please click here.