HERBERT A. ROSS
U.S. Bankruptcy Judge

      (a) A hearing was held on February 22, 1991 on the motion of defendants (except Patrick Ames) for a stay pending appeal.

      (b). The Ames defendants, except Patrick, are now represented by J. Douglas Williams II as of about February 14, 1991. After a trial on December 17 and 18, 1990, a partial judgment under F.R.Civ.P. 54(b) was entered on January 25, 1991     1 ABR 397  against all the Ames (except Patrick) authorizing the trustee to sell Tract F, Jolley Acres Subdivision, Fairbanks Recording District, to Howard Otis for $69,000. Patrick Ames was defaulted on January 28, 1991, and a final judgment was entered: (1) ratifying the sale of Tract F; (b) stating that the trustee's interest in Tract F was superior to any of the defendants; and, (c) denying Joan Ames' homestead exemption.

      (c). The trustee closed a sale of Tract F with Howard Otis for $69,000 on January 31, 1991 and the documents were recorded on February 1, 1991. This was within the 10-day automatic stay period of F.R.Civ.P. 62(a), incorporated by Bankruptcy Rule 7062.

      (d). Joan Ames filed a notice of appeal on February 7, 1991 which was mailed on February 4, 1991. Mr. Williams filed another notice of appeal on about February 14, 1991 for all the Ames, except Patrick. February 4, 1991 was the last day to appeal with respect to the final partial judgment entered January 25, 1991 authorizing the sale, and the first notice of appeal filed by Joan Ames is untimely under the holding of In re Ramsey, 612 F.2d 1220 (9th Cir. 1981).

      Ramsey held that a notice of appeal under Bankruptcy Rule 802(a), predecessor to the current Bankruptcy Rule 8002(a), is effective only upon actually filing, not just mailing. The notices of appeal filed by Joan Ames, herself, on February 7, 1991 and by Mr. Williams on February 14, 1991 are untimely with respect to the     1 ABR 398  final January 25, 1991 partial judgment authorizing the sale of Tract F.

      A sale of property authorized by a bankruptcy court is valid, unless stayed, even if a buyer knows of a pending appeal. 11 U.S.C. § 363(m). Although the sale of Tract F may have gone forward during the period of the automatic stay, barring a timely appeal of the order of sale, that sale is merely voidable and not void. Cf. In re Schwartz, 119 B.R. 207 (9th Cir. BAP 1990), dealing with a stay under § 362(a) of the Bankruptcy Code.

      (e). The court indicated at the hearing on a motion for stay pending appeal on February 22, 1991, that a $70,000 bond would be required for a stay pending appeal, but on reflection, the court will not issue a stay of the January 25, 1991 judgment allowing the sale since the notice of appeal for Mr. Williams' clients is untimely. With respect to the other issues, whether the Ames represented by Mr. Williams are entitled to share the proceeds of the sale as co-owners and whether Joan Ames is entitled to a homestead exemption, no bond need be posted because the funds are being held by the trustee pending further court order.

      Therefore,

      IT IS ORDERED that a stay pending appeal of the January 25, 1991 judgment authorizing the sale of Tract F is DENIED, but stay of the January 28, 1991 judgment concerning the co-ownership interests of the Ames and the validity of Joan Ames homestead exemption is issued without bond.