Michael Ennis v. Fair Play Real Estate, LLC , 692 F. App'x 892 ( 2017 )


Menu:
  •                              NOT FOR PUBLICATION                         FILED
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS                        JUN 30 2017
    MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
    U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
    In re: MICHAEL JOHN ENNIS,                      No. 16-60076
    Debtor,                            BAP No. 16-1057
    ______________________________
    MICHAEL JOHN ENNIS,                             MEMORANDUM*
    Appellant,
    v.
    FAIR PLAY REAL ESTATE, LLC,
    Appellee.
    Appeal from the Ninth Circuit
    Bankruptcy Appellate Panel
    Kirscher, Jury, and Taylor, Bankruptcy Judges, Presiding
    Submitted June 26, 2017**
    Before:      PAEZ, BEA, and MURGUIA, Circuit Judges.
    Michael John Ennis appeals pro se from an order of the Bankruptcy
    Appellate Panel (“BAP”) dismissing as moot Ennis’s appeal from a bankruptcy
    *
    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).
    court’s order granting appellee’s motion to lift the automatic stay under 
    11 U.S.C. § 362
    (d). We have jurisdiction under 
    28 U.S.C. § 158
    (d). We review de novo the
    BAP’s determination that a bankruptcy appeal is moot. Nat’l Mass Media
    Telecomm. Sys., Inc. v. Stanley (In re Nat’l Mass Media Telecomm. Sys., Inc.), 
    152 F.3d 1178
    , 1180 (9th Cir. 1998). We affirm.
    The BAP properly dismissed Ennis’s appeal as moot because appellee Fair
    Play Real Estate, LLC, took possession of the property in dispute pursuant to an
    unlawful detainer judgment obtained in state court, which prevented the BAP from
    granting Ennis effective relief. See 
    id. at 1180-81
     (a case is moot where “an event
    occurs while a case is pending appeal that makes it impossible for the court to
    grant any effectual relief” (citation and internal quotation marks omitted)).
    In light of our disposition, we do not reach Ennis’s arguments addressing the
    underlying merits of the appeal.
    Appellee’s motion to take judicial notice (Docket Entry No. 13) is granted.
    AFFIRMED.
    2                                     16-60076
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 16-60076

Citation Numbers: 692 F. App'x 892

Filed Date: 6/30/2017

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 1/13/2023