these cases inappo-site to the current situation. In both Indre-lunas and Reid, the lower court filed an extensive opinion explaining its disposition. After filing such an opinion, the court failed to enter a separate judgment or order. In this case, the bankruptcy court has entered an order without filing an opinion. We conclude that both of the orders entered by the bankruptcy court are separate judgments within the meaning of Bankruptcy Rule 9021. The order granting summary judgment is a brief order that gives no detailed explanations and does not contain an opinion or a memorandum. The mere fact that the order contains a single sentence detailing the history of the proceedings does not disqualify it as a separate order. See Laidley v. McClain, 914 F.2d 1386, 1390 (10th Cir.1990) (<HOLDING>). Furthermore, the document was clearly
holding that unauthenticated documents cannot be considered at summary judgment holding that a grant of summary judgment in favor of one party creates a final judgment allowing appellate review of denial of opposing partys summary judgment motion holding that the rule 12b6 ruling was not a final judgment and did not bind the district court at summary judgment holding that a summary judgment order containing a single sentence adopting the report of a magistrate met the separate judgment rule and did not require that two documents be used instead of one holding summary judgment order was not a final judgment because it did not dispose of the defendants claim for attorneys fees