William Bender V. , 480 F. App'x 445 ( 2012 )


Menu:
  •                                                                            FILED
    NOT FOR PUBLICATION                              MAY 08 2012
    MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS                       U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS
    FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
    In re: WILLIAM P. BENDER,                        No. 11-60006
    Debtor.                            BAP No. 10-1121
    WILLIAM P. BENDER,                               MEMORANDUM *
    Appellant,
    v.
    DIANE M. MANN, Chapter 7 Trustee;
    THE WARREN AND ROSALIE
    GUMMOW TRUST,
    Appellees.
    In re: WILLIAM P. BENDER,                        No. 11-60007
    Debtor.                            BAP No. 10-1122
    CONGREJO INVESTMENTS, LLC,
    Appellant,
    *
    This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
    except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
    v.
    DIANE M. MANN, Chapter 7 Trustee,
    Appellee.
    Appeals from the Ninth Circuit
    Bankruptcy Appellate Panel
    Pappas, Jury, and Bauer, Bankruptcy Judges, Presiding
    Submitted April 16, 2012 **
    San Francisco, California
    Before: SCHROEDER, O’SCANNLAIN, and GRABER, Circuit Judges.
    I
    In No. 11-60007, Congrejo Investments, LLC challenges the bankruptcy
    court’s order avoiding the transfer of property from William P. Bender, Debtor, to
    Congrejo. The Trustee filed a motion to dismiss this appeal as moot because the
    property at issue has now been sold to a purchaser in good faith.
    We deny the motion to dismiss. Though the sale of the property cannot be
    undone because no stay order was sought, see 
    11 U.S.C. § 363
    (m), relief could still
    be awarded in the form of damages, see, e.g., In re Berg, 
    45 B.R. 899
    , 902 (B.A.P.
    **
    The panel unanimously concludes that this case is suitable for
    decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
    2
    9th Cir. 1984), assuming that the estate contains additional property, see In re
    Filtercorp, Inc., 
    163 F.3d 570
    , 577–78 (9th Cir. 1998).
    On the merits, the bankruptcy court properly applied equitable tolling to the
    Trustee’s avoidance action. The court found that Bender actively concealed his
    interest in and conveyance of the property, that the Trustee did not discover the
    conveyance until five months after the deed was executed, and that the Trustee
    diligently investigated the estate’s possible claim to the property. These findings
    are supported by the record and are not clearly erroneous. Applying equitable
    tolling in these circumstances is proper. See, e.g., In re Olsen, 
    36 F.3d 71
    , 73 (9th
    Cir. 1994). Tolling rescues the Trustee’s otherwise time-barred claim, see Socop-
    Gonzalez v. INS, 
    272 F.3d 1176
    , 1193–95 (9th Cir. 2001) (en banc), and the
    avoidance order must be affirmed.
    II
    In No. 11-60006, Bender appeals the bankruptcy court’s order overruling his
    objection to the William and Rosalie Gummow Trust’s proof of claim. Because
    Bender presents this appeal as contingent on the reversal of the avoidance order,
    which we instead affirm, we grant the motion to dismiss this appeal as moot. See
    Church of Scientology v. United States, 
    506 U.S. 9
    , 12 (1992).
    No. 11-60007 is AFFIRMED and No. 11-60006 is DISMISSED.
    3