Theresa McDonald v. Pg&e Corporation ( 2022 )

NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS MAY 25 2022
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
THERESA ANN McDONALD, No. 20-17366
Appellant, D.C. No. 4:20-cv-04568-HSG
v.
MEMORANDUM*
PG&E CORPORATION, PACIFIC GAS
AND ELECTRIC COMPANY,
Appellees,
OFFICE OF THE U.S. TRUSTEE,
Trustee-Appellee,
OFFICIAL COMMITTEE OF TORT
CLAIMANTS; OFFICIAL COMMITTEE
OF UNSECURED CREDITORS,
Creditors-Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of California
Haywood S. Gilliam, Jr., District Judge, Presiding
Submitted May 17, 2022**
*
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
**
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
Before: CANBY, TASHIMA, and NGUYEN, Circuit Judges.
This appeal has been held in abeyance since September 23, 2021, pending
resolution of Adventist Health System/West v. Fire Victim Trust (In re Pacific Gas
& Electric Company), No. 21-15447. The stay is lifted.
Theresa Ann McDonald appeals pro se from the district court’s order
dismissing her bankruptcy appeal. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. §§ 158(d)
and 1291. We review de novo the district court’s legal conclusions and for clear
error its factual findings. JPMC 2007-C1 Grasslawn Lodging, LLC v. Transwest
Resort Props. Inc. (In re Transwest Resort Props., Inc.), 801 F.3d 1161, 1168 (9th
Cir. 2015). We affirm.
The district court properly dismissed McDonald’s appeal as equitably moot
because McDonald did not obtain a stay pending appeal, there has been substantial
consummation of debtors’ plan, and the bankruptcy court could not fashion
effective and equitable relief “without completely knocking the props out from
under the plan and thereby creating an uncontrollable situation for the bankruptcy
court.” Motor Vehicle Cas. Co. v. Thorpe Insulation Co. (In re Thorpe Insulation
Co.), 677 F.3d 869, 881 (9th Cir. 2012) (setting forth factors for determining
equitable mootness).
We reject as without merit McDonald’s contention that the bankruptcy court
lacked authority to enter its plan confirmation order.
2 20-17366
McDonald’s motion to expedite (Docket Entry No. 29) is denied as moot.
AFFIRMED.
3 20-17366