The AI workspace for legal professionals
- Legal research with access to more than 1 million sources
- Document automation
- Matter management
- Hosted in the EU and Switzerland
Try it free for 14 days (10 questions/day during trial)
The AI workspace for legal professionals
Try it free for 14 days (10 questions/day during trial)
16-15527•In re: PACIFIC THOMAS CORPORATION, DBA Pacific Thomas Capital, DBA Safe Storage v. KYLE EVERETT, Trustee
16-15527Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMay 24, 2018
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
In re: PACIFIC THOMAS
CORPORATION, DBA Pacific Thomas
Capital, DBA Safe Storage,
Debtor.
______________________________
RANDALL C.M. WHITNEY,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
KYLE EVERETT, Trustee,
Defendant-Appellee.
No. 16-15527
D.C. No. 3:14-cv-05325-MMC
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of California
Maxine M. Chesney, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted May 15, 2018**
Before: SILVERMAN, BEA, and WATFORD, Circuit Judges.
Randall C.M. Whitney appeals pro se from the district court’s order
* 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).
FILED
MAY 24 2018
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
-- 1 of 2 --
2 16-15527
affirming the bankruptcy court’s order finding that Whitney had violated the
automatic stay. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 158. We dismiss.
Our review of the record and the parties’ responses to the court’s November
5, 2017 order to show cause reflects that this appeal is equitably moot, because the
trustee sold the underlying property in 2014, and Whitney has failed to establish
his standing to prosecute on behalf of the debtor a state court challenge to the city’s
Certificates of Compliance. See Motor Vehicle Casualty Co. v. Thorpe Insulation
Co. (In re Thorpe Insulation Co.), 677 F.3d 869, 881 (9th Cir. 2012) (factors to be
considered when deciding whether an appeal is equitably moot).
Whitney’s motion for an extension of time to file a reply to appellee’s
response to the court’s order to show cause (Docket Entry No. 59) is granted. The
reply has been filed at Docket Entry No. 58.
DISMISSED.
-- 2 of 2 --
Connect Omnilex to search the legal corpus from your AI assistant.